LB 


17    SbE 


University  of  Texas  Bulletin 

No.  2236;     September  22,  1922 


A  Mill  Tax  for  the  Support  of  Higher  Educational 
Institutions  in  Texas 


The  Interscholastic  League  Division 

Bureau  of  Extension 


PUBLISHED  BY 

THE  UNIVERSITY  OF  TEXAS 
AUSTIN 


GIFT  OF 


£  f 


Jl-2226-9-2-22-5« 


University  of  |T_exas  Bulletin 

No.  2236:     September  22,  1922 


A  Mill  Tax  for  the  Support  of  Higher  Educational 
Institutions  in  Texas 


The  Interscholastic  League  Division 

Bureau  of  Extension 


PUBLISHED  BY  THE  UNIVERSITY  FOUR  TIMES  A  MONTH,  AND  ENTERED  AS 
SECOND-CLASS  MATTER  AT  THE  POSTOFFICE  AT  AUSTIN.  TEXAS, 

UNDER  THE  ACT  OF  AUGUST  24,  1912 


The  benefits  of  education  and  of 
useful  knowledge,  generally  diffused 
through  a  community,  are  essential 
to  the  preservation  of  a  free  govern- 
ment. 

Sam    Houston 

Cultivated  mind  is  the  guardian 
genius  of  democracy.  ...  It  is  the 
only  dictator  that  freemen  acknowl- 
edge and  the  only  security  that  free- 
men desire. 

Mirabeau  B.  Lamar 


PREFACE 

This  bulletin  has  been  prepared  primarily  for  use  in  con- 
nection with  the  debates  among  the  schools  belonging  to 
the  University  Interscholastic  League.  However,  since  it 
deals  with  a  subject  of  vital  interest  and  importance  to  the 
people  of  Texas  at  this  time,  it  is  hoped  that  it  will  be 
widely  used  by  debating  societies,  civic  organizations,  and 
individual  citizens. 

It  should  be  noted  that  the  question  for  debate  is  not  the 
support  of  our  higher  institutions  of  learning.  Ail  good 
citizens  who  are  informed  on  the  subject  favor  the  main- 
tenance of  these  units  in  our  state  educational  system.  The 
question  for  discussion  is,  the  method  and  degree  of  such 
support.  .  Arguments  on  both  sides  of  this  issue  will  be 
found  throughout  this  bulletin,  oftentimes  in  a  single  ar- 
ticle. It  was  therefore  impracticable  to  separate  into  dis- 
tinct groups  the  arguments  pro  and  con.  The  bulletin  was 
prepared  by  Edwin  DuBois  Shurter,  Professor  of  Public 
Speaking,  and  R.  C.  Coffee,  A.B.,  LL.B. 

Each  school  belonging  to  the  Interscholastic  League  is 
entitled  to  two  free  copies  of  this  bulletin,  but  these  will 
be  sent  only  upon  application.  For  additional  copies  and 
to  non-residents  of  Texas  a  charge  of  15  cents  a  copy  is 
made.  Address  Interscholastic  League,  University  Station, 
Austin,  Texas. 

In  collating  material  for  this  bulletin  grateful  acknowl- 
edgment is  made  of  the  assistance  rendered  by  Miss  Octavia 
Rogan,  State  Legislative  Librarian,  who  through  question- 
naires obtained  a  large  part  of  the  material  bearing  upon 
the  method  of  supporting  higher  educational  institutions 
in  other  states.  The  editors  also  desire  to  acknowledge 
their  indebtedness  to  Mr.  H.  J.  L.  Stark  of  Orange,  Chair- 
man of  the  University  Board  of  Regents,  for  his  co-opera- 
tion in  the  work  of  assembling  material. 

The  University  Interscholastic  League. 


INTRODUCTION 

The  subject  for  debate  in  the  University  Intersch elastic 
League  for  1922-23  is:  "Resolved,  that  an  amendment  to 
the  Texas  State  Constitution  should  be  adopted  providing 
for  a  three-mill  tax  for  the  support  of  the  State's  higher 
educational  institutions;  and  that  supplementary  appropri- 
ations by  the  Legislature  should  be  prohibited."  By  a 
"mill  tax"  is  meant  a  tax  of  three  mills  on  every  dollar  of 
assessed  property  in  the  state,  or  thirty  cents  on  every 
one  hundred  dollars.  By  "constitutional  tax"  is  meant  an 
amendment  to  the  state  constitution  by  a  vote  of  the  people 
fixing  such  a  tax,  as  opposed  to  a  statutory  tax  which  might 
be  adopted  by  legislative  enactment.  The  term  "state  in- 
stitutions of  higher  education"  includes  the  University  of 
Texas  comprising  the  Main  University  at  Austin,  the  Med- 
ical School  at  Galveston  and  the  School  of  Mines  at  El  Paso, 
the  Agricultural  and  Mechanical  College,  the  College  of  In- 
dustrial Arts,  the  Grubbs  Vocational  College,  the  John  B. 
Tarleton  Agricultural  College,  the  seven  state  normals  for 
white  teachers  comprising  the  North  Texas  State  Normal, 
the  Southwest  Texas  Normal  School,  the  West  Texas  Nor- 
mal School,  the  Sam  Houston  Normal  School,  the  East 
Texas  Normal  College,  the  Sul  Ross  Normal  College  and 
the  Stephen  F.  Austin  Normal  School,  and  the  Prairie  View 
Normal  for  Negroes. 

Under  the  present  system  of  support  each  institution 
must  submit  to  the  State  Board  of  Control,  not  later  than 
the  fifteenth  day  of  September  of  each  year  preceding  the 
regular  biennial  session  of  the  Legislature,  an  itemized 
statement  of  all  expenditures  for  the  preceding  two  years, 
together  with  an  estimate  of  the  appropriations  required 
for  the  succeeding  biennium,  itemized  in  such  form  as  may 
be  practicable  and  as  said  Board  of  Control  may  require. 
The  Board,  upon  receipt  of  these  estimates,  is  required  care- 
fully to  consider  and  investigate  each  item  contained  there- 
in, obtaining  information  from  every  available  source,  and 


A  Mill  Tax  for  Higher  Educational  Institutions          5 

after  holding  hearings  thereon,  must  make  up  an  appro- 
priation budget  for  the  approaching  Legislature.  The  Leg- 
islature then  makes  appropriations  for  the  two  years  next 
succeeding.  It  may  alter,  change,  or  vary  the  proposed- 
budget  in  any  manner  it  deems  proper.  A  school  may  re- 
quest a  certain  amount  or  sum  for  a  particular  department, 
and  the  Board  of  Control  may  recommend  another,  or  the 
same  amount  for  that  department,  while  the  Legislature 
may  appropriate  an  amount  entirely  different  from  the 
recommendations  of  either.  In  addition  to  the  biennial  ap- 
propriations, the  University  receives  about  $200,000  each 
year  from  its  permanent  endowment  fund  established 
through  grants  of  land  by  the  founders  of  the  state.  The 
Agricultural  and  Mechanical  College  received  from  the 
United  States  Government  in  1919-20,  according  to  the 
latest  available  statistics  issued  by  the  United  States  Bureau 
of  Education,  $340,124. 

Nineteen  states  have  a  fixed  tax  for  the  support  of  their 
institutions  of  higher  education.  Some  of  these  states  pro- 
vide for  the  tax  in  their  state  constitutions  while  in  others 
the  tax  is  by  legislative  enactment.  In  practically  all  states 
having  a  special  tax,  the  revenue  derived  therefrom  is  sup- 
plemented by  special  appropriations  by  the  Legislature. 
The  tax  varies  from  a  small  fraction  of  a  mill  in  some  states 
to  more  than  three  mills  in  others.  In  some  states  the  tax 
is  applied  to  the  support  of  only  the  state  university,  while 
in  others  it  applies  to  all  the  higher  schools,  including  the 
state  normals.  A  few  states  provide  a  mill  tax  for  building 
purposes  only.  In  most  states  the  Legislature  appropriates 
from  the  general  revenue  a  sum  which  is  considered  neces- 
sary for  the  needs  of  the  higher  institutions.  In  several 
states  these  institutions  have  large  endowments,  and  a  few, 
including  Texas,  California,  and  Michigan,  have  a  perma- 
nent land  endowment  which  supplements  the  annual  income. 

Dissatisfaction  with  the  existing  status  of  financial  sup- 
port for  our  state  institutions  of  higher  education  has  long 
been  felt  by  leading  educators  and  statesmen.  This  has 
been  due  in  part  to  the  inadequacy  of  the  legislative  appro- 


6  University  of  Texas  Bulletin 

priations,  and  in  part  to  the  feeling  that  this  method  of 
support  is  harmful  in  other  ways  which  could  be  remedied 
by  a  change  in  method.  Some  have  proposed  a  constitu- 
tional amendment,  fixing  a  definite  tax;  for  the  special 
schools;  some  have  favored  instead  a  legislative  measure 
establishing  the  tax,  or  as  still  others  have  proposed,  set- 
ting aside  a  certain  per  cent  of  the  total  state  revenue  for 
the  higher  schools ;  while  yet  another  remedy  advanced  has 
been  the  idea  of  a  permanent  fund  created  by  the  issuance 
of  bonds. 


THE  ARGUMENT  PRO  AND  CON 
THE  ISSUES  INVOLVED 

It  should  be  borne  in  mind  that  the  question  to  be  debated 
is  simply  a  question  of  the  best  method  of  providing  the 
necessary  support  commensurate  with  the  interests  and  wel- 
fare of  the  state.  The  affirmative  will  assume  and  the 
negative  will  readily  admit,  that  Texas  is  below  even  the 
average  of  states  of  equal  population  and  wealth,  in  the 
matter  of  financal  support  given  her  state  schools.  The 
issues  involved,  therefore,  are:  (1)  Will  the  proposed  plan 
provide  more  liberal  support  than  the  present  method? 
(2)  Are  there  other  evils  connected  with  the  present 
method  which  the  proposed  plan  would  remedy?  (3)  Is 
the  proposed  plan  better  than  any  other  that  couldi  be 
advanced?  (4)  Does  the  experience  of  other  states  justify 
the  adoption  of  the  proposed  plan? 

THE  CASE  FOR  THE  AFFIRMATIVE 

In  proposing  a  constitutional  tax  of  three  mills  for  the 
support  of  our  state  institutions  of  higher  learning,  the 
affirmative  maintains: 

1.  (a)  That  under  the  existing  plan  of  biennial  appro- 
priations all  of  the  state's  higher  schools  are  suffering  from 
lack  of  sufficient  funds  to  meet  their  growing  needs.  The 
buildings,  the  equipment,  and  the  teaching  force  of  the 
schools  are  inadequate  and  insufficient  to  meet  the  demands 
of  the  student  bodies.  Dormitory  and  housing  facilities  are 
unprovided ;  shack  and  temporary  wooden  structures  supply 
the  necessary  classroom  space;  the  services  of  the  best 
teachers  and  professors  are  hard  to  secure  and  retain  on 
account  of  the  lowness  and  uncertainty  of  salary  and  po- 
sition. Consequently  Texas  ranks  far  belovv^  states  her 
equal  in  wealth  and  population  in  providing  for  her  higher 
schools,  and  as  a  result  many  Texas  students  go  outside 


8  University  of  Texas  Bulletin 

of  the  state  and  spend  thousands  of  dollars  annually  in 
other  educational  institutions. 

(b)  The   governing   boards    cannot   formulate   definite 
policies  for  their  respective  schools  covering  a  number  of 
years.     They  never  know  from  one  Legislature  to  the  next 
how  much  will  be  appropriated.     One  Legislature  and  a 
Governor  may  follow  a  policy  whereby  certain  provisions 
are  made  for  carrying  on  the  schools,  and  they  may  make 
fairly  liberal  appropriations ;  while  the  next  Legislature  and 
Governor  may  occupy  a  different  attitude  toward  the  schools 
and  hence  abolish  the  provisions  of  the  previous  Legislature 
or  institute  new  or  different  provisions  for  carrying  on  the 
schools  and  make  less  liberal  appropriations.     Thus  the  pro- 
cess continues  from  time  to  time.     Any  successful  business 
enterprise  must  have  clearly  defined  policies  and  plans  for 
future  operation  in  order  to  be  efficient  and  economical  in 
executing  its  purposes ;  likewise,  these  same  principles  apply 
to  these  public  enterprises,  and  definite  policies  are  just  as 
essential  to  their  success  and  efficient  and  economical  opera- 
tion.    The  haphazard  and  uncertain  plans  and  policies  that 
go  hand  in  hand  with  legislative  appropriations  will   be 
eliminated  through  the  mill  tax. 

(c)  The  schools  are  subject  to  undue  political  influence. 
The  heads  of  the  institutions  must  spend  most  of  their  time 
during  each  legislative  session  at  the  State  Capitol  in/  order 
to  present  the  needs  and  claims  of  their  schools  to  the 
Legislature.     They  must  place  themselves  upon  a  common 
level  with  every  lobbyist,  who  comes  for  a  selfish  purpose, 
in  pleading  for  the  educational  facilities  for  the  boys  and 
girls  of  the  state.     Such  a  policy  must  carry  with  it  all  the 
wire  pulling,  log-rolling  and  swapping  of  votes  that  is  known 
to  exist  in  legislative  action.     A  Governor,  or  any  member 
or  set  of  members  of  the  Legislature,  who  may  be  or  who 
may  become  personal  or  political  enemies  of  the  heads  of  a 
school  or  its  faculty,  can  under  the  present  plan  injure  or 
seek  to  destroy  that  school  in  order  to  give  vent  to  their 
political   antagonism.     The    action    of   the    Thirty-seventh 


A  Mill  Tax  for  Higher  Educational  Institutions          9 

Legislature  in  adopting  the  "Pope  Amendment"  to  the  ap- 
propriation bills  for  the  educational  institutions  shows 
clearly  the  tendency  by  the  Legislature  to  usurp  the  power 
and  authority  of  the  governing  boards  and  regulate  the  in 
stitutions  in  the  most(  minute  details.  In  frequent  political 
controversies  these  schools  are  made  the  tools  of  politics. 
The  affirmative  contends  that  such  is  not  consistent  with 
the  steady  growth  and  development  of  such  institutions; 
that  the  present  plan  inevitably  draws  these  institutions 
into  the  political  arena  to  become  the  football  of  politics, 
and  that  the  mill  tax  will  avoid  such  detrimental  political 
influences. 

(d)  Jealousies  and  hurtful  rivalries  among  the  different 
institutions  result  from  the  biennial  scramble.  The  heads 
of  the  schools  go  in  to  get  all  they  can  for  their  particular 
school,  and  each  readily  feels  the  discrimination  and  differ- 
ence in  treatment  that  may  be  received  at  the  hands  of  the 
Legislature.  One  school  frequently. contends  that  a  certain 
function  and  sphere  of  activity  belongs  to  it,  while  another 
asserts  that  such  function  belongs  to  it  and  that  it  should 
receive  the  appropriation  for  such  work.  Hence  each  school 
becomes  a  rival  of  the  other  in  the  scramble  for  appropria- 
tions. Such  condition  prevents  the  co-operation  and  cor- 
relation of  the  work  of  the  different  schools  into  a  unified 
system. 

The  student  may  find  material  for  the  further  develop- 
ment of  the  arguments  above  outlined  from  the  reports  of 
the  Boards  of  Regents,  the  reports  and  investigations  of  the 
Legislature,  a  part  of  which  is  contained  herein,  and  from 
the  articles  by  the  various  Texas  citizens  and  other  excerpts 
printed  herein. 

2.  (a)  That  a  constitutional  tax  of  three  mills  will 
render  adequate  financial  aid.  It  would  produce  a  revenue 
of  $10,366,080.26  as  based  upon  the  assessed  valuation 
of  1921  of  $3,455,360,089.  This  revenue  would  furnish 
about  two  million  dollars  more  than  the  state  schools  of 
higher  learning  requested  for  1921-1922,  and  about  five 
and  a  half  million  more  than  the  Legislature  appropriated 


10  University  of  Texas  Bulletin 

for  1921-1922.  Hence  the  proposed  tax  would  be  very 
liberal  and  would  enable  the  schools  to  supply  the  present 
need  for  buildings  and  equipment  and  to  form  a  definite 
policy  for  future  maintenance. 

(b)  It  will  provide  an  automatic  means  of  definite  and 
increasing  support  to  meet  the  increasing  demands  of  the 
schools  from  year  to  year.     The  table  of  assessed  valuations 
contained  herein  shows  that  the  average  increased  valua- 
tion is  about  $100,000,000  annually.     This  increased  valu- 
ation would  increase  the  mill  tax  revenue  for  the  schools 
about  $300,000  per  year.     Hence  as  the  enrollment  increases 
from  year  to  year,  the  revenue  would  likewise  increase  with 
the  wealth  of  the  state  to  meet  such  demands. 

(c)  It  will  remove  the  schools  from  politics.     It  relieves 
them  from  their  biennial  appeal  to  the  Legislature  and  the 
consequent  political  controversies  and  influences  resulting 
therefrom. 

(d)  It  will  place  them  upon  a  dignified  basis  of  independ- 
ence that  will  remove  existing  causes  of  hurtful  rivalry. 
The  revenue  is  both  known  and  fixed  for  years  in  advance, 
and  they  are  no  longer  struggling  competitors  to  be  fed  ac- 
cording to  the  humor  and  whims  of  different  law-making 
bodies.     Upon  such  basis  they  are  left  free  to  co-operate  in 
the  correlation  and  unification  of  our  educational  system, 
and  to  inaugurate  more  permanent  policies. 

3.  The  affirmative  further  maintains  that  a  tax  of  three 
mills,  the  revenue  therefrom  growing  with  the  growth  of 
the  state,  will  be  adequate  for  the  support  of  our  institu- 
tions of  higher  learning;  that  it  should  be  a  constitutional 
provision,  and  not  subject  to  change  and  repeal  through 
legislative  action ;  and  that  by  the  exercise  of  due  foresight 
unforseen  contingencies  or  losses  in  the  administration  of 
the  school's  funds  can  be  provided  against.  Texas  has  a 
vast  expanse  of  territory,  a  large  amount  of  undeveloped 
resources ;  and  is  fast  becoming  the  wealthiest  state  in  the 
Union.  The  state  valuation  of  property  is  more  than  three 
times  as  great  today,  as  the  valuation  of  twenty  years  ago. 
Hence  the  affirmative  maintains,  that,  since  a  three  mill  tax 


A  Mill  Tax  for  Higher  Educational  Institutions         11 

is  very  liberal  at  the  outset,  a  sufficient  income  will  be  pro- 
duced from  the  continuous  growth  in  wealth  of  the  state 
to  supply  the  needs  of  higher  education  for  all  time  to  come ; 
that  the  need  for.  supplementary  appropriations  will  not 
exist  and  should  therefore  be  prohibited.  Such  prohibition 
will  place  the  schools  on  notice  that  they  must  make  pro- 
visions from  this  income  for  any  unforeseen  contingencies 
and  economic  fluctuations;  and  that  such  a  policy  would 
establish  a  more  economic  and  business  like  management  of 
the  schools. 

The  constitutional  provision  would  prevent  one  Legisla- 
ture from  destroying  the  work  of  another,  and  the  hap- 
hazard and  unbusinesslike  management  that  must  prevail 
under  legislative  appropriations  and  supervisions. 

4.  The  experience  of  other  states  shows  that  a  mill  tax 
sufficiently  liberal  is  the  best  method  for  the  support  of 
higher  education.  It  is  advocated  and  supported  by  the 
most  able  authorities.  The  student  will  find  ample  ma- 
terial herein  showing  the  results  of  the  mill  tax  in  other 
states,  and  the  authorities  supporting  such  a  tax. 

THE  CASE  FOR  THE  NEGATIVE 

The  negative  will  readily  admit  the  need  of  more  liberal 
financial  support  for  the  state's  higher  educational  institu- 
tions. It  may  also  be  admitted  that,  under  existing  condi- 
tions, these  schools  are  sometimes  subjected  to  unnecessary 
and  hurtful  rivalries  and  political  influences.  However, 
among  other  and  better  plans  for  meeting  the  situation  than 
that  proposed  by  the  affirmative  are : 

(1)  Remove  by  constitutional  amendment  the  present 
prohibition  upon  the  Legislature  of  levying  taxes  or  mak- 
ing appropriations  for  the  erection  of  buildings  for  the 
State  University,  and  enact  a  statutory  law  levying  a  special 
tax  for  the  support  of  all  the  schools  for  higher  education. 

(2)  Adopt  a  constitutional  tax  of  two  or  two  and  a  half 
mills,  say,  and  leave  the  Legislature  free  to  make  supple- 
mentary appropriations. 


12  University  of  Texas  Bulletin 

(3)  Adopt  a  constitutional  amendment  that  will  permit 
the  issuing  of  bonds  for  the  creation  of  a  permanent  fund 
for  the  different  institutions,  such  fund  to  be  supplemented 
by  biennial  legislative  appropriations. 

(4)  Establish  a  severence  tax  on  certain  natural  products* 
as  oil,  gas,  sulphur,  lumber,  etc.,  similar  to  that  adopted  by 
the  state  of  Louisiana  as  set  forth  in  a  subsequent  part  of 
this  pamphlet. 

In  weighing  the  advantages  of  any  one  or  all  of  these 
measures  over  the  one  advanced  by  the  affirmative,  let  us 
consider  the  objections  to  the  affirmative  proposition.  First 
and  fundamentally  it  is  too  rigid.  It  does  not  admit  of  a 
possible  contingency  when  the  schools  would  have  need  ot 
additional  assistance  which  they  could  not  obtain  on  account 
of  the  prohibition  of  appropriations  by  the  Legislature. 
Such  a  contingency  might  be  due  to  a  fire,  a  shrinking  in 
taxable  value,  on  account  of  crop  failure,  financial  panic,  a 
change  in  the  method  of  valuation,  or  an  unlooked-for  in- 
crease in  attendance  at  the  different  schools.  Furthermore, 
Texas  has  established  in  the  last  six  or  eight  years  five  new 
institutions  of  higher  education  comprising  the  East  Texas 
Normal  College,  Sul  Ross  Normal  College,  Stephen  F.  Aus- 
tin Normal,  Grubbs  Vocational  College,  and  John  Tarleton 
Agricultural  College  and  a  mill  tax  that  would  have  been 
liberal  and  adequate  a  few  years  ago,  would  be  absolutely 
inadequate  to  meet  the  needs  of  today.  Hence  it  is  reason- 
able to  suppose  that,  with  the  continued  growth  and  devel- 
opment of  the  present  institutions,  with  West  Texas  now 
demanding  an  A.  and  M.  College,  and  with  the  need  for 
other  institutions  that  may  arise  in  the  future,  the  proposed 
plan  would  be  wholly  inadequate  within  a  few  years.  It  has 
been  found  expedient  to  increase  the  tax  rate  for  general 
revenues  from  time  to  time ;  then  why  might  It  not  be  neces- 
sary to  do  the  same  for  the  tax  rate  for  higher  education? 
The  negative  contends  that  it  would  be  unwise  to  tie  our- 
selves down  to  the  hard  and  fast  plan  proposed  by  the  af- 
firmative. 

The  experience  of  other  states  does  not  argue  either  the 


A  Mill  Tax  for  Higher  Educational  Institutions        13 

necessity  for  or  the  advisability  of  so  rigid  a  measure.  The 
recent  experience  of  Oregon,  Montana  and  Arizona  shows 
clearly  the  inadvisability  of  such  a  measure.  The  increased 
valuation  has  not  kept  pace  with  the  growth  and  develop- 
ment of  the  schools.  They  must  conform  to  the  economic 
fluctuations  under  the  proposed  plan.  This  rigidity  could 
not  be  easily  removed  by  constitutional  amendment,  for 
experience  shows  that,  no  matter  how  obviously  desirable 
a  constitutional  change  may  be,  it  is  next  to  impossible  to 
get  the  people  to  adopt  it,  especially  if  it  would  make  pos- 
sible an  increase  in  the  expenses  of  government. 

This  absolute  removal  of  the  schools  from  financial  de- 
pendence upon  the  Legislature  is  also  undemocratic,  and 
might  easily  lead  to  extravagance  and  to  the  growth  of  aris- 
tocratic or  ultra-conservative  tendencies  in  the  schools.  The 
legislators  are  elected  directly  by  the  people  and  are  highly 
susceptible  to  the  interests  of  the  public.  The  budget  sys- 
tem and  legislative  control  thereby  furnishes  those  checks 
and  balances  essential  to  the  growth  and  development  of 
thoroughly  democratic  institutions.  State  supported  insti- 
tutions should  be  highly  responsive  to  the  public  needs.  In 
a  representative  or  democratic  form  of  government  the  duly 
elected  representatives  of  the  people  must  be  the  sole  judge 
of  those  needs.  The  boards  of  regents  for  the  different  in- 
stitutions, who  are  appointed  by  the  Governor,  are  usually 
men  that  are  very  busy  in  private  affairs.  They  have  little 
time  to  devote  to  the  institutions,  and  consequently  they 
know  very  little  about  the  real  inner-workings  and  nature 
of  those  institutions.  They  almost  invariably  do  and  act  as 
the  head  of  their  institutions  advises  and  directs.  Hence 
under  the  affirmative's  plan  the  schools  would  take  from  the 
people  of  the  state  their  taxes  for  support  and  at  the  same 
time  they  would  be  practically  the  sole  judge  as  to  how  they 
would  spend  the  people's  money  and  the  nature  and  kind  of 
service  they  would  render  to  them.  While  it  is  admitted 
that  they  should  not  be  entirely  dependent  upon  any  par- 
ticular legislature  for  support,  yet  to  remove  them  alto- 


14  University  of  Texas  Bulletin 

gether  from  any  dependence  upon  the  body  which  repre- 
sents the  people,  would  be  equally  as  bad.  A  middle  ground 
is  the  best,  such  as  would  obtain  under  either  of  the  plans 
proposed  by  the  negative. 

The  plan  of  issuing  bonds  for  the  creation  of  a  permanent 
fund  for  the  different  institutions,  such  fund  to  be  supple- 
mented by  the  biennial  appropriations,  might  be  advanced 
as  an  alternative  measure.  This  plan  has  from  time  to  time 
received  the  attention  and  support  of  educators  and  mem- 
bers of  the  Legislature  and  of  the  governing  boards  of  the 
different  institutions.  A  strong  point  in  favor  of  bond 
issues  is  that  this  would  distribute  the  cost  of  education 
more  equitably,  since  a  larger  share  of  such  cost  would  fall 
upon  succeeding  generations  who  will  reap  the  benefits  of 
educating  the  present  generations.  If  cities  and  counties 
may  issue  bonds  for  school  purposes,  why  not  the  Legisla- 
ture, representing  the  whole  state,  issue  bonds  for  the 
support  of  the  special  state  schools?  Is  not  one  as  demo- 
cratic, as  just,  and  as  desirable  as  the  other?  The  chief 
point  against  such  a  proposition  is  the  people's  inherent 
prejudice  against  the  issuance  of  bonds.  But  the  people 
are  also  strongly  opposed  to  any  increase  in  the  tax  rate, 
and  the  constitutional  amendment  proposed  by  the  affirma- 
tive would  probably  be  as  difficult  to  pass  as  would  an 
amendment  authorizing  and  instructing  the  Legislature  to 
issue  bonds  for  the  creation  of  a  permanent  fund  for  the 
purpose  under  consideration. 

Either  of  the  plans  suggested  by  the  negative  would  ren- 
der adequate  financial  aid  without  leading  to  extravagance ; 
would  be  sufficiently  automatic  and  definite  to  enable  the 
school  authorities  to  pursue  consistent  plans  through  a  per- 
iod of  years ;  would  remove  the  schools  from  politics  so  far 
as  that  is  desirable;  would  lessen  materially  the  strife  and 
jealousies  among  the  different  institutions  caused  by  the 
evils  which  must  be  expected  from  the  rigid  and  undemo- 
cratic plan  of  the  affirmative. 

AFFIRMATIVE  REBUTTAL 
1.     The  affirmative  will  need  to  be  prepared  to  point  out 


A  Mill  Tax  for  Higher  Educational  Institutions        15 

the  defects  of  any  plan  the  negative  may  offer.  Usually  it 
may  be  urged  against  the  plans  of  the  negative  that  they 
fail  to  solve  the  problems  of  higher  education.  They  will 
either  provide  inadequate  revenue  or  subject  the  schools 
to  the  same  harmful  political  influences  that  exist  under  the 
present  plan,  and  usually  both  of  these  objections  may  be 
urged.  Hence  no  material  improvement  is  obtained  over 
the  present  system.  In  reference  to  the  four  plans  pre- 
viously stated  the  affirmative  may  urge  that  the  negative 
have  agreed  with  them  insofar  as  their  plans  furnish  a 
certain  and  definite  income ;  but  the  affirmative  will  contend 
further  that  their  plans  do  not  go  far  enough  to  provide 
a  sufficient  income  that  is  definite  and  permanent;  that  if 
supplemental  appropriations  are  permitted  or  if  their  plan 
is  subject  to  change  and  repeal  by  any  and  every  Legisla- 
ture, the  same  political  interference  and  haphazard  methods 
will  continue  to  exist  and  no  efficient  business  policy  can  be 
established  and  continued. 

2.  The  affirmative  in  defense  of  their  plan  will  urge  that 
the  negative's  objection  to  its  rigidity  is  based  upon  the  as- 
sumption that  the  income  will  be  insufficient  to  meet  each 
and  every  need  as  it  arises,  and  that  in  the  course  of  a  few 
years  it  will  be  entirely  inadequate ;  but  the  affirmative  con- 
tends, that  this  assumption  does  not  arise  in  reference  to 
their  plan,  that  a  three-mill  tax  provides  a  very  liberal  in- 
come sufficient  to  provide  at  once  the  needed  buildings  and 
equipment,  that  the  income  continues  to  increase  with  the 
development  and  increase  in  wealth  of  the  state  and  wi!l 
be  sufficient  to  meet  the  growing  needs  of  higher  education 
in  tfte  future.     Then,  since  the  income  is  sufficient  and  sup- 
plemental appropriations  are  not  needed,  the  same  should 
be  prohibited.     Such  a  plan  will  force  the  schools  to  adopt 
a  business  policy  to  meet  any  contingency  that  might  arise, 
and  it  would  prevent  the  schools  from  going  to  the  Legisla- 
ture, and  seeking  supplemental  appropriations  that  would 
result  in  extravagant  expenditures. 

3.  The  affirmative  may  further  contend  that  the  people 
will  have  sufficient  control  through  the  Governor,  and  the 


16  University  of  Texas  Bulletin 

Board  of  Regents,  to  make  the  schools  responsive  to  the 
public  needs  and  at  the  same  time  keep  in  check  any  ex- 
travagant, undemocratic  and  ultra-conservative  tendencies. 
It  may  be  granted  that  in  the  absence  of  the  legislative  con- 
trol and  check  on  the  schools  through  legislative  appropria- 
tions under  the  present  system  the  people  would  not  have 
sufficient  control  to  make  the  schools  responsive  to  their 
needs  and  welfare;  but  the  affirmative  will  contend  that 
proper  control  and  check  by  other  methods,  can  be  obtained 
that  will  be  better  than  the  popular  control  and  check  se- 
cured through  legislative  appropriations  which  inherently 
carries  with  it  certain  evils  previously  pointed  out  by  the 
affirmative.  The  Board  of  Regents  or  governing  boards 
could  be  made  responsible  directly  to  the  people,  or  an  edu- 
cational council  as  suggested  by  the  Central  Investigating 
Committee  of  the  Thirty-fifth  Legislature  could  be  estab- 
lished in  order  to  give  the  people  proper  and  sufficient  con- 
trol and  check  on  the  schools  under  the  proposed  mill  tax. 
Other  and  sufficient  data  may  be  found  in  the  subsequent 
pages  to  further  sustain  the  arguments  of  the  affirmative. 

The  foregoing  outlined  arguments  for  the  affirmative  and 
negative  are  intended  to  be  suggestive  only;  and  the  stu- 
dents are  expected  to  organize  and  develop  the  arguments 
for  themselves.  The  student  will  need  to  be  more  specific 
and  concrete  and  to  develop  more  fully  the  arguments  as 
suggested  in  the  outline.  Material  for  other  and  new  ar- 
guments may  be  gathered  from  the  subsequent  articles  con- 
tained herein. 


0) 


CO    O    O    O    O    O 
03    O    O    O    O    O 


o  o  o  o  o  o 
'  q  q  q  q  q  q 

2  TH  o"  -*  d  d  d  d  o"  d  10  d  o*  10 

+3  tOTHO03O-^OscOOCMLO-^05 

Oj  rH~-<*O5iO3-<3<tOO5O3COtOOO5O5^tO 

oi        co  LO"  oT  ccf  to"  r^  03"  03~  TH"  03"  r^  r-T  05"  oT 

r<      b€       .OSCOC-^rHOSOSCOOSt-t-tr-OS 
CbJOCOt-rHrHTHO3r-i<MrHrHTH  4— 


. 


3  S 

O      & 


OOOoOOOOO 

ooooooooo 


(M    O    O    O    O 

03  ®  ®  q  "— j 

O5    rH     rH    rf    O 
'-|tOO3003O5T^OcOtO^Tj<05 

^  r£  co_  -^  q  ^  ^  q  co  cq  03  op  to  CM_ 

fOLOO300LO^fCOO3 
O5t>t—    LOrHrHO 

^CO^t-rHrHTHCOOS 


O    LO    O    O 


tO  -<*  CO  LO  LO 
00  O  t>  00  O5 
i—i  O3  rH  rH 


P  COOOOOOOOoOOOO 

^  oaqqqqqqqqqqqq 

c  SLoddddddio'dddd 

O  ^COOOrHOOrHrHCOt>I>LOcOO5 

O  rH"°l^OtT0^LO'l~lTHl^<:g~C^00~ 

«n  co  co"  oT  TjT  c<T  03"  co"  ^  d  LO"  LO  r-T  -^ 

.t-OOCOO3Ti<G500coLO^tOl> 

_-  h/)bJDr~|OO3O3O3T}*rHc<|O3O3rH 


O 

fc 

02 

Q 
O 

O 

CO 

« 
ffi 

O 


COOOOOOOOoOOOO 

j^JqqqqqqOqqoqq 

O5LOTJHddLOdC>LOLOLOLOO 

rHCOOOrHOOLOrHOSQqOSrH^-^f 

•>  OS    LO    Tf    O3^  CO    LO    C*^  00    LO    00^  TJ<    O3^ 

^-^     CO     LO     00     ^^     rH     CO     "^     f^i     ^*     00     tO     LO 

t-^OOOS-^coOSr^TjHOOOO 

^jr)rH^OOrHO3rHCOC'3Tj*COrHCOO3 


^    f    O    O    05 


o  o  o 
o  o  o 


OoOOOOOO 

LOoq^qqqq 
ddLO-^oooLo'd 

LO     LO     TH     T"1     t-     O     rH 


LO 


t-  t>  to  co  to 


CO    CO    rH    O3    LO    "<tf 
.     tO     O     O     rH     CO 

b/)  to  r-  co  LO  co 


co 


^^  "^  OO  "^  rH 
3  O  O3  CO  CO  rH 
?  O  -^  CO  LO  rH 


5  w 


§000000 
o  o  o  o  o  o 


02 

fn    O3    O    O    O 

03  03  q  q  q 
Kj__it~oocot>^QLoocoodo 

r^  ^LO-^LOOtOLoCOOSOSOOOLO 
^^  CO  LO  "^  "^  C>*  eo  ^^  rH  ^t1  £*•  "^  CO 
CO  Co"T-rT-rCo"rjr— rT^O5"o3"rH1Lo"co" 
-"-'tC-OOosSTf^OOSCOrH 
^^LOcOoo^LO^cO03CO 


03 
03  g 

X    o>    t 
«     60    O 

H  a  55 


o  * 

0) 

S  > 


Z-v 

0)      C 
>     03 


&  <  OH 


O     o 

o  6 
•e'1 

bx)   o 

^•-g 

c   g 

5  > 

a  .§ 

H-g 
^1 


13    : 
<  ^ 
s 

o 


a 


College  of 
Sam  Hou 


North  Texas  State  Nor; 
Southwest  Texas  N 


w 


11 

^ 


ft 
9  3 

02   02 


18 


University  of  Texas  Bulletin 


TEXAS  TAX  RATE  AND  THE  TOTAL  VALUE  OF  THE  PROP- 
ERTY ASSESSED  EACH  YEAR  FOR  THE  YEARS 
1884   TO   1921,   INCLUSIVE 

TAKEN  FROM  THE  REPORT  OF  COMPTROLLER 


Year 


Rate  of  Tax 
Revenue  School 


1884 $0.17% 


$0.12y2 


1885  .... 

25 

1886  .... 

25 

1887  .... 

;....,  .25 

1888  .... 

.10 

1889 

20 

1890  .... 

20 

1891  .... 

16% 

1892  .... 

15 

1893  

15 

1894  .... 

.15 

1895  .... 

:  25 

1896  .... 

20 

1897  .... 

j  20 

1898  .... 

20 

1899  .... 

20 

1900  .... 

16% 

1901  .... 

16% 

1902  .... 

16% 

1903  .... 

16% 

1904  .... 

16% 

1905  .... 

20 

1906  .... 

20 

1907  .... 

12% 

1908  .... 

06V4 

1909  .... 

05 

1910  .... 

04 

1911  .... 

.12% 

1912  .... 

10 

1913  .... 

23 

1914  .... 

12% 

1915  

30 

1916  .... 

20 

1917  

35 

1918  .... 

30 

1919  . 

.35 

.12% 


.12% 
.12% 

.121/2 

.12% 

.12% 

.12% 

.12% 

.20 

.18 

.18 

.18 

.18 

.18 

.18 

.18 

.18 

.18 

.18 

.18 

.20 

.16% 

.16% 

.16% 

.16% 

.16% 

.17 

.20 

.20 

.20 

.20 

.20 

.35 


Total 
Valuation 

5    603,060,917 

621,011,989 

630,591,029 

650,412,401 

681,084,904 

729,175,564 

782,111,883 

856,202,283 

856,526,600 

886,175,395 

865,120,898 

860,910,567 

850,309,246 

854,894,775 

854,619,365 

922,927,231 

946,320,258 

982,187,865 

1,017,571,732 

1,064,948,033 

1,082,779,775 

1,139,022,730 

1,221,159,869 

1,635,297,115 

2,174,122,480 

2,309,803,626 

2,388,500,124 

2,515,632,745 

2,532,710,050 

2,680,907,991 

2,743,078,976 

2,755,171,793 

2,748,310,775 

2,871.744,269 

3,012,819,287 

3,200,295,205 


A  Mill  Tax  for  Higher  Educational  Institutions        19 

1920 22  .35  3,390,953,149 

1921    22  .35  3,455,360,089 

ANNUAL   ENROLLMENT   AT    THE    UNIVERSITY    OF    TEXAS 
FROM  1883  TO  1921 

1883-1884  221  1903-1904 1,294 

1884-1885 209  1904-1905  1,414 

1885-1886  199  1905-1906  1,907 

1886-1887  245  1906-1907  2,141 

1887-1888  250  1907-1908  2,321 

1888-1889  278  1908-1909  2,425 

1889-1890  309  1909-1910  2,522 

1890-1891  283  1910-1911  2,712 

1891-1892  388  1911-1912  2,872 

1892-1893  353  1912-1913  3,323 

1893-1894  482  1913-1914  3,499 

1894-1895  630  1914-1915  3,899 

1895-1896  730  1915-1916  4,215 

1896-1897  751  1916-1917  4,624 

1897-1898  800  1917-1918 4,045 

1901-1902  1,240  1920-1921  6,988 

1902-1903  1,281  1918-1919  5,060 

1 808-1899  986  1919-1920  6,445 

1899-1900  983 

1900-1901  1,094                   Total 73,318 

COLLEGE    ENROLLMENT   IN   TEXAS 
J.  A.  HILL,  PRESIDENT  WEST  TEXAS  STATE  NORMAL 
Name  of  College  1910-1911       1920-1921 

University    of    Texas 2,712  6,988 

A  .and  M.  College   (excluding  Summer  School)     1,082  1,848 

College  of  Industrial   Arts 340  2,016 

Sam   Houston   Normal   Institute 1,073  2,101 

North  Texas  State  Normal  College 1,261  3,349 

Southwest    Texas    State    Normal    College    (ex- 
cluding Summer  School) 506  712 

West  Texas   State  Normal   College ' 612  2,179 

East  Texas  State  Normal  College ...  1,858 

Sul  Ross   State  Normal  College 417 

Prairie  View  State  Normal   College 766  820 

John    Tarleton    College 740 

Grubbs  Vocational   College 493 


Total 8,352  23,521 


20  University  of  Texas  Bulletin 

LEGISLATIVE  APPROPRIATIONS  FOR  SOME  OF  THE  TEXAS 
STATE    SCHOOLS    OF   HIGHER   LEARNING 

1903-04  1922-23 

University    of    Texas $173,006.66         $1,395;461.00 

Agricultural  and  Mechanical  College. .  139,000.00  739,910.00 

College   of    Industrial   Arts 53,483.00  292,940.00 

Sam    Houston    Normal    School 40,100.00  292,940.00 

North    Texas   State   Normal 80,250.00  231,330.00 

Southwest   Texas   Normal    School 37,831.00  192,600.00 

Prairie  View   Normal   School 32,500.00  176,204.00 

THE  MILL-TAX  METHOD  OF  SUPPORT  FOR  STATE 
INSTITUTIONS  OF  HIGHER  EDUCATION  IN  TEXAS 

BY  F.  M.  BRALLEY,  PRESIDENT,  COLLEGE  OF  INDUSTRIAL  ARTS, 
DENTON,  TEXAS 

The  mill-tax  method  of  supporting  state  institutions  of 
higher  learning  has  been  tried,  and  still  obtains  in  several 
states  of  the  Union.  In  every  case,  this  plan  has  proven 
more  satisfactory  than  has  the  plan  of  support  by  legisla- 
tive appropriations  alone.  In  other  states,  the  scheme  of 
support  is  by  a  mill-tax  and  supplemental  appropriations 
by  the  Legislature.  In  no  state  has  this  method  proven  un- 
satisfactory. On  the  other  hand  the  authorities  of  these 
state  institutions  are  enthusiastic  in  their  approbation,  and 
emphatically  state  that  such  method  is  far  superior  and  is 
much  to  be  preferred  to  the  former  old  method  of  appro- 
priations alone.  The  certainty  and  dependability  of  the 
mill-tax  method  give  assurance  and  continuity  to  the  annual 
maintenance  of  higher  education;  and  furthermore,  such 
plan  affords  an  opportunity  for  planning  and  realizing  sure 
and  ample  development  of  state-supported  higher  educa- 
tional institutions. 

Among  the  states  in  which  the  mill-tax  method  is  in 
operation  may  be  mentioned  Arizona,  Arkansas,  Colorado, 
Illinois,  Indiana,  Kansas  (voted  but  not  levied),  Kentucky, 
Louisiana,  Michigan,  Minnesota,  Montana,  Nevada,  New 
York  (temporary),  Ohio,  Oregon,  Tennessee,  Utah,  Wash- 
ington, Wisconsin,  and  Wyoming. 


A  Mill  Tax  for  Higher  Educational  Institutions        21 

The  adoption  of  the  mill-tax  method  of  support  for  the 
state  institutions  of  higher  education  of  Texas  would  re- 
quire an  amendment  to  the  state  constitution.  The  rate  of 
such  tax,  in  order  to  remedy  the  present  situation  and  guar- 
antee future  support  and  development,  should  be  between 
two  mills,  and  three  and  one-half  mills.  The  inadequate 
support  of  the  Texas  state  institutions  of  higher  learning, 
for  the  current  fiscal  year,  is  equivalent,  approximately, 
to  a  two-mill  tax.  Since  no  expansion,  increased  facilities, 
or  enlargements  were  provided  for  the  present  fiscal  year, 
it  is  evident  that  a  two-mill  tax  would  not  be  adequate. 

In  order  to  procure  the  adoption  at  an  election  by  the 
people,  of  an  amendment  to  the  state  constitution  authoriz- 
ing the  mill-tax  method  of  support,  it  would  be  necessary 
to  have  the  united,  wholesouled,  and  harmonious  support  of 
all  the  state  institutions  of  higher  education.  Such  support, 
in  my  opinion,  would  be  contingent  upon  an  equitable  and 
satisfactory  fixed  apportionment  among  the  said  institu- 
tions of  the  income  to  be  derived  from  such  tax.  Therefore, 
the  rate  of  the  mill-tax  to  be  levied  for  the  state  -institutions 
of  higher  learning  and  an  equitable  and  fair  apportionment 
of  the  income  from  such  tax  among  the  several  state  insti- 
tutions of  higher  education,  must  be  plainly  set  forth  in  the 
proposed  constitutional  amendment.  In  addition,  a  definite 
apportionment  in  the  constitutional  amendment  would  ren- 
der impossible  any  misunderstanding  among  the  institutions 
that  might  arise  if  the  amendment  failed  to  make  such 
apportionment.  On  the  other  hand,  such  a  plan  would  have 
the  effect  of  encouraging  and  maintaining  harmony  and  co- 
operation among  the  state  supported  educational  institu- 
tions. It  seems  feasible  and  expedient  to  me  that  the  au- 
thorities of  all  the  state  institutions  of  higher  learning  in 
Texas  should  unite  on  such  a  plan  of  procedure  and,  in  a 
spirit  of  concerted  action  and  a  realization  of  a  common 
purpose,  clearly  present  the  necessity  and  the  merits  of 
such  a  plan  to  the  people  of  Texas.  Such  presentation 
should  be  made  in  clear  and  unequivocal  terms  and  in  a 
manner  that  would  be  convincing  to  the  people  of  Texas. 


22  University  of  Texas  Bulletin 

This  unanimous  action  and  hearty  co-operation  is  the  only 
hope  for  the  adoption  of  the  mill  tax  method,  in  whole  or  in 
part,  for  the  support  of  our  institutions  of  higher  learning. 
I  believe  there  is  a  desire  and  a  disposition  on  the  part  of 
all  authorities  of  state  institutions  of  higher  learning  in 
Texas  to  co-operate  along  broad,  constructive  lines  of  edu- 
cational procedure.  In  this  way,  hurtful  competition  would 
be  practically  impossible  while  initiative,  freedom,  and 
alertness,  so  essential  to  educational  efficiency,  will  be  pre- 
served and  guaranteed.  There  is  no  such  thing  as  pro- 
crustean  uniformity  and  the  highest  efficiency  at  one  and 
the  same  time  among  educational  institutions.  Since  these 
institutions  are  supported  by  public  funds  and  since  there 
is  ample  room  in  Texas  for  full  development  of  them  all, 
both  public  and  private,  their  authorities  should  join  hands 
in  a  spirit  of  genuine  comradeship,  and  should  labor  unitedly 
for  a  common  aim.  Our  wish  now  is  to  place  the  College 
of  Industrial  Arts  upon  record  as  assuming  an  attitude  and 
spirit  of  fellowship  and  hearty  sympathy  and  friendship 
for  all  other  educational  institutions  in  Texas.  Further- 
more, we  wish  to  extend  to  this  committee,  and  all  friends 
of  higher  education,  unreservedly,  our  entire  strength  and 
ability  in  furthering  and  perpetuating  any  movement  or 
measure  that  may  contribute  to  the  promotion  and  upbuild- 
ing of  the  educational  machinery  and  of  society  in  general 
in  this  commonwealth.  In  presenting  such  a  plan  to  the 
people,  we  can  assure  you  that  the  alumnae  of  the  College 
of  Industrial  Arts,  representing  nearly  20,000  women  resid- 
ing in  all  parts  of  the  state,  will  give  their  assistance  will- 
ingly and  unreservedly. 

HON.  A.  B.  CURTIS,  MEMBER  OF  TEXAS  LEGISLATURE, 
FORT    WORTH,    TEXAS 

It  is  my  opinion  that  the  best  method  of  distribution  of 
the  public  funds,  whether  national,  state  or  local,  is  to  vest 
the  power  of  such  distribution  in  the  same  department  of 
government  vested  with  the  power  and  duty  to  provide  for 


A  Mill  Tax  for  Higher  Educational  Institutions        23 

the  levy  and  collection  of  such  funds.  All  state  revenues 
must  be  levied  and  collected  under  bills  passed  by  the  Legis- 
lature, subject  to  the  action  of  the  Governor  thereon.  The 
legislators  are  elected  directly  by  the  people  and  are  highly 
susceptible  to  the  interests  of  the  public.  I  think  it  unwise 
to  take  away  from  the  Legislature  the  power  to  finally  pass 
upon  the  different  appropriations  of  the  moneys  which  it 
must  provide  for,  and  vest  such  power  in  boards  of  regents 
or  other  bodies  which  are  appointed  and  not  elected  by  di- 
rect vote  of  the  people.  Each  institution  and  department, 
under  the  present  law,  is  expected  to  prepare  its  budget 
and  submit  the  same  to  the  Board  of  Control;  the  original 
budgets  with  recommendations  of  the  Board  of  Control  are 
presented  to  the  financial  committees  of  both  houses,  and 
the  heads  of  the  different  institutions  and  departments  may 
and  do  advise  with  said  committees  as  to  the  proper  appro- 
priations to  be  made.  The  bills  as  finally  recommended  by 
the  committees  are  subject  to  public  discussion  and  to  the 
approval  of  the  membership  of  both  houses  and  to  the  action 
of  the  Governor.  This  budget  system  with  the  checks  pro- 
vided on  the  action  of  the  heads  of  the  different  institutions 
and  departments,  as  well  as  the  action  of  the  Legislature, 
is  in  my  opinion  superior  to  any  other  method  which  has 
been  called  to  my  attention. 

It  is  but  natural  that  the  heads  of  each  institution  and 
department  should  think  that  their  particular  institution  or 
department  are  of  prime  importance,  and  each  such  head 
does  strive  in  every  honorable  manner  to  secure  the  appro- 
priation which  he  thinks  proper  for  his  particular  depart- 
ment or  institution.  If  our  constitution  should  be  amended 
and  the  mill-tax  imposed  and  all  discretion  as  to  the  amount 
of  expenditure  should  be  taken  away  from  the  Legislature, 
it  is  but  natural  that  each  institution  would  find  a  method 
to  expend  all  the  taxes  collected  for  its  maintenance. 

If  a  mill-tax  ought  to  be  imposed  for  the  support  of  the 
higher  educational  institutions  the  same  method  should  log- 
ically be  pursued  as  to  each  and  every  institution  and  de- 
partment. If  such  should  be  done  and  a  separate  mill-tax 


24  University  of  Texas  Bulletin 

imposed  for  the  maintenance  of  each  institution  and  depart- 
ment, some  scientific  method  must  first  be  worked  out  by 
which  each  would  have  sufficient  but  not  too  much  appro- 
priation for  its  maintenance.  There  could  be  no  provision 
made  in  constitutional  amendments  providing  for  mill-tax 
for  the  increased  or  decreased  amounts  that  might  prove 
to  be  necessary  for  each  department  or  institution  as  the 
same  might  demand  larger  or  smaller  appropriations;  for 
if  such  provision  should  be  made,  the  power  must  then  be 
vested  in  the  Legislature  or  some  other  body  to  increase  or 
decrease  such  appropriations  and  to  provide  appropriations 
for  new  institutions  or  departments  as  the  same  might  be- 
come necessary,  and  such  method  would  be  subject  to  the 
same  objections  as  are  urged  against  the  present  method. 
If  the  rate  of  taxation  is  absolutely  fixed  by  the  constitu- 
tion for  each  department  or  institution,  the  same  could  not 
be  varied  except  by  constitutional  amendment,  which  is 
slow  and  uncertain.  If  the  Legislature  is  still  to  be  allowed 
the  power  to  add  appropriations  out  of  the  general  funds  to 
mill-taxes  imposed,  or  to  use  any  portion  thereof  for  any 
other  purpose,  no  real  change  has  been  made. 

If  it  is  proposed  to  levy  a  lump  mill-tax  for  all  the  higher 
educational  institutions,  the  same  method  should  be  pursued 
as  to  all  the  departments  and  all  the  eleemosynary  institu- 
tions. If  this  is  the  method  proposed,  power  must  still  be 
vested  in  the  Legislature  or  some  other  body  to  make  distri- 
bution of  the  mill-tax  levies  to  the  different  institutions  and 
departments.  This  would  result  in  no  material  change  or 
improvement  of  the  present  method. 

It  has  been  charged  that  our  educational  institutions  are 
now  in  politics  and  that  their  heads  must  use  political  meth- 
ods to  obtain  the  necessary  appropriations. 

As  stated  in  the  foregoing  paragraphs  the  mill-tax  method 
offers  no  relief  from  this  objection  unless  a  fixed  mill-tax 
is  to  be  imposed  for  each  institution  and  department,  which 
could  not  be  done  in  such  a  method  as  to  insure  proper  but 
not  exorbitant  appropriations,  as  the  amount  of  revenues 
and  the  demands  for  each  institution  and  department  might 


A  Mill  Tax  for  Higher  Educational  Institutions        25 

vary,  and  as  the  same  might  vary  no  relief  could  be  afforded 
except  by  the  slow  and  uncertain  method  of  again  amending 
our  constitution.  In  fact  under  such  a  method,  the  institrr 
tions  would  fare  well  and  probably  have  exorbitant  appro- 
priations during  prosperous  years  when  large  taxes  are 
collected,  and  would  have  inadequate  support  during  the 
hard  years  when  large  amounts  of  taxes  remain  unpaid. 

If  the  mill-tax  method  should  be  carried  to  its  logical 
conclusion  and  the  amount  of  taxes  allowed  by  the  constitu- 
tion should  be  apportioned  by  constitutional  amendment 
among  the  •  different  institutions  and  departments,  there 
would  be  no  way  to  provide  for  the  additional  institutions 
or  departments  that  it  might  become  necessary  to  establish 
except  to  increase  the  constitutional  limit  of  taxation  and 
thereby  unduly  burden  the  taxpayers.  Such  increased  bur- 
dens are  the  logical  result  of  the  mill-tax  method  of  taxa- 
tion. 

There  has  been  considerable  complaint  to  the  effect  that 
under  the  present  method  our  different  educational  institu- 
tions may  be  allowed  varying  amounts  by  the  Legislature, 
and  that  there  is  therefore  no  uniformity  in  appropriations 
allowed  them.  This  criticism  is  largely  unwarranted.  Dur- 
ing the  two  terms  of  my  experience  in  the  Legislature  there 
have  been  at  least  three  increases  in  the  salaries  allowed 
in  the  budgets  for  the  different  educational  institutions.  The 
last  increase  was  allowed  upon  the  theory  that  larger  sala- 
ries were  temporarily  necessary  because  of  the  abrormal 
and  unusual  expenses  of  living.  This  temporary  increase 
could  not  have  been  provided  for  under  the  mill-tax  method, 
but  was  provided  for  under  the  present  system.  At  the 
last  session  of  the  Legislature,  many  of  the  legislators  be- 
lieved that  these  temporary  increases  had  served  their  pur- 
pose and  that  living  expenses  had  about  returned  to  normal 
and  that  therefore  the  budget  allowed  for  the  ensuing  two 
years  should  be  upon  the  same  basis  as  obtained  prior  to 
the  temporary  increases.  The  result  was  a  long  continued 
fight  and  a  compromise  under  which  the  professors  in  the 
State  University  were  allowed  about  $4,500  annual  salaries 


26  University  of  Texas  Bulletin 

and  the  heads  of  the  different  normal  institutions  $4,300 
annual  salaries,  the  same  being  material  increases  over  the 
amounts  allowed  prior  to  the  emergency  raises.  This  re- 
sulted in  a  slight  decrease  of  certain  salaries  from  that 
allowed  under  said  emergency  increases,  but  such  decreases 
were  warranted  and  necessary  and  proper  to  prevent  the 
imposition  of  exorbitant  taxation  upon  the  people.  The 
same  session  of  the  Legislature  by  the  elimination  of  un- 
necessary positions  and  expenses  cut  the  appropriations  for 
the  different  state  departments  for  the  coming  two  years 
in  the  amount  of  about  $750,000,  which  cut  "would  have 
been  impossible  if  the  mill-tax  method  had  been  in  force. 
As  a  result  of  these  cuts  the  same  tax  rate  was  levied  for 
1922  as  that  for  1921 ;  whereas  if  such  cuts  had  not  been 
made  it  would  have  been  necessary  to  levy  a  tax  to  the  con- 
stitutional limit  and  an  additional  indirect  tax  on  gasoline 
or  some  other  commodity  of  general  use  in  order  to  provide 
the  necessary  revenue. 

In  view  of  the  present  financial  distress  of  the  vast  ma- 
jority of  the  people  I  do  not  think  such  increases  were  war- 
ranted. If  a  mill-tax  adequate  for  the  period  of  unusually 
high  prices  had  been  levied  no  reduction  thereof  could  have 
been  made  by  the  Legislature  when  normal  prices  returned. 
If  a  mill  tax  had  been  levied  during  the  period  of  normal 
prices,  no  provision  could  have  been  made  for  the  period 
of  inflated  prices. 

For  years  our  federal  government  has  endured  the  ills 
resulting  from  dictation  from  different  bureaus  as  to  the 
amount  appropriated  for  their  maintenance.  As  a  result 
direct  and  indirect  federal  taxation  has  become  more  and 
more  burdensome  until  at  last  there  is  an  effort  to  enforce 
a  budget  system  and  for  Congress  to  exercise  its  legal  func- 
tions in  the  matter  of  control  of  appropriations.  If  we 
were  to  provide  for  mill  taxes  for  our  different  institutions, 
the  same  would  be  expended  under  the  direction  of  their 
governing  boards  and  we  have  no  assurance  that  such 
method  would  not  result  in  the  same  extravagant  and  ex- 
cessive expenditures  as  have  existed  in  the  different  federaJ 


A  Mill  Tax  for  Higher  Educational  Institutions        27 

departments  and  bureaus.  The  governing  bodies  of  the  dif- 
ferent state  institutions  are  not  elected  by  the  people  arid 
are  not  directly  responsible  to  the  .public.  They  are  nat- 
urally and  properly  enthusiastic  for  their  particular  insti- 
tutions. They  are  likely  if  uncontrolled,  to  incur  expenses 
which  might  not  appear  necessary  to  a  disinterested  body 
representing  the  public  and  charged  with  the  duty  of  ap- 
portioning the  available  revenues.  An  an  allustration  of 
the  truth  of  what  I  have  just  said,  the  bills  presented  to  the 
last  Legislature  provided  for  appropriations  for  publicity 
for  three  of  the  educational  institutions  varying  from 
$2500  to  $10,000  per  annum,  when  the  heads  of  said  insti- 
tutions were  complaining  that  they  did  not  have  sufficient 
facilities  to  take  care  of  all  the  students  desiring  to  attend 
their  institutions.  This  unnecessary  appropriation  was  cut 
out  by  the  Legislature.  Under  the  mill  tax  system  such 
cut  would  have  been  impossible. 

It  has  been  widely  charged  that  I  am  an  enemy  to  educa- 
tion. This  charge  is  untrue.  I  am  a  patron  of  the  State 
University  and  was  at  one  time  a  public  school  teacher.  1 
realize  that  it  is  imperative  that  provision  be  made  for  our 
public  schools  and  that  it  is  fit  and  proper  that  liberal  appro- 
priations be  provided  for  our  higher  educational  institution. 
However,  our  public  schools  are  of  primary  importance  and 
should  be  first  provided  for,  and  thereafter  due  provision 
should  be  made  for  the  higher  educational  institutions.  If 
we  were  to  provide  a  mill  tax  for  the  higher  educational 
institutions  and  give  them  the  amounts  they  might  demand, 
I  am  fearful  that  there  would  not  be  sufficient  remaining 
available  revenues  to  provide  public  school  facilities  for  the 
children  who  might  not  be  given  such  advantages  by  their 
local  communities. 

Before  we  undertake  a  new  and  largely  untried  experi- 
ment in  the  method  of  distribution  of  taxes  and  depart  from 
the  method  which  has  been  proven  efficient  by  years  of  ex- 
perience, we  should  be  sure  that  the  new  method  offers  ma- 
terial advantages.  I  do  not  believe  that  any  such  advan- 
tages would  be  offered  by  the  mill  tax  system,  therefore  I 


28  University  of  Texas  Bulletin 

am  satisfied  to  pursue  the  course  laid  down  by  our  fathers 
and  under  which  we  have  prospered  for  all  these  years. 

THE  FINANCIAL  SUPPORT  OF  OUR  INSTITUTIONS 
OF  HIGHER  LEARNING 

BY  W.  B.   BIZZELL,  PRESIDENT,  A.  AND  M.  COLLEGE  OF  TEXAS 

State  supported  institutions  of  higher  learning  in  the 
United  States  are  generally  financed  in  one  or  more  of  the 
following  ways: 

(1)  By  direct  appropriation  of  the  Legislature. 

(2)  By  a  millage  tax. 

(3)  By  a  combination  of  these  methods. 

These  methods  are  supplemented  in  individual  cases  by 
the  income  from  land-grant  endowments,  private  benefac- 
tions, and  taxes  on  mineral  resources.  In  the  state  of 
Louisiana  the  latter  takes  the  form  of  a  salvage  tax  and 
of  natural  resources,  including  timber  as  well  as  minerals. 

It  is  almost  universally  agreed  that  financial  support  of 
institutions  of  higher  learning  exclusively  by  legislative 
enactment  is  not  satisfactory.  The  reasons  are  well  known 
to  those  who  have  studied  the  defects  of  this  plan.  It  has 
been  found  from  experience  that  support  exclusively  by  leg- 
islative action  is  uncertain  and  often  irrational.  The  fre- 
quent changes  in  the  personnel  of  legislative  bodies  prevent 
an  adequate  understanding  on  the  part  of  the  members 
of  the  Legislature  of  the  actual  needs  of  the  state  supported 
institutions  of  higher  learning  and  an  intelligent  under- 
standing of  the  problems  of  financial  administration. 

As  a  means  of  overcoming  these  difficulties  a  number  of 
states  have  provided  either  by  statute  or  by  constitutional 
amendment  for  supplementing  legislative  appropriations 
through  a  millage  tax.  This  policy  has  greatly  increased 
the  administrative  efficiency  in  the  institutions  of  higher 
learning  in  every  state  where  this  policy  has  been  adopted. 
The  states  supporting  institutions  by  this  method  are  pro- 
vided with  dependable  maintenance  which  enables  the  ad- 
ministrative authorities  to  plan  for  the  development  of  the 


A  Mill  Tax  for  Higher  Educational  Institutions        29 

physical  plants  and  expend  the  facilities  of  the  institutions 
in  an  intelligent  and  carefully  considered  way. 

Existing  conditions  in  Texas  seem  to  justify  a  radical 
change  in  the  policy  of  financing  our  state  supported  insti- 
tutions of  higher  learning.  The  increasing  cost  of  govern- 
ment has  caused  many  educators  and  other  public  spirited 
citizens  to  feel  a  deep  concern  about  the  future  support  of 
our  educational  institutions.  This  concern  is  enhanced  in 
view  of  the  fact  that  the  number  of  students  who  are  seek- 
ing admission  to  our  colleges  and  universities  is  increasing 
faster  than  present  facilities  for  their  education.  This  con- 
dition seems  to  justify  a  more  comprehensive  plan  for  finan- 
cing our  institutions  than  has  yet  been  provided  in  any  ot 
the  several  states. 

It  is  suggested,  therefore,  that  a  different  policy  be 
adopted  with  reference  to  financing  a  development  of  the 
physical  plants  from  the  policy  providing  for  maintenance 
and  support.  This  plan  contemplates  a  bond  issue  for  per- 
manent improvements  at  the  several  institutions  of  higher 
learning  and  a  millage  tax  to  be  supplemented,  if  necessary, 
by  legislative  appropriation  for  maintenance  and  support. 

We  are  reminded  that  the  local  political  units  have  al 
ready  adopted  this  policy.  Hard  surfaced  roads,  city  streets, 
and  public  buildings  in  counties  and  cities  are  uniformily 
financed  through  bond  issues.  Why  not  extend  this  policy 
with  reference  to  permanent  improvements  at  our  state  sup- 
ported educational  institutions?  This  plan  would  distribute 
the  cost  over  a  period  of  years  and  either  relieve  the  tax 
burden  or  enable  the  Legislature  to  provide  more  adequately 
for  the  support  of  the  state  government. 

The  objection  is  raised  that  it  would  require  a  constitu- 
tional amendment  to  authorize  the  Legislature  to  provide 
such  a  bond  issue  and  that  there  is  little  hope  that  the 
people  would  endorse  a  plan  of  this  kind.  I  am  not  at  all 
sure  that  this  argument  is  valid.  If  it  is  valid  the  same 
argument  would  apply  to  a  millage  tax,  which  will  also 
require  a  constitutional  amendment.  There  is  reason  to 
believe  that  if  a  constitutional  amendment  were  proposed 


30  University  of  Texas  Bulletin 

providing  both  for  a  bond  issue  for  permanent  improve- 
ment and  a  millage  tax  for  maintenance  and  support,  it 
would  pass,  if  the  people  were  thoroughly  informed  concern- 
ing the  merits  of  the  proposal.  At  any  rate  I  am  convinced 
that  the  benefits  that  would  be  derived  from  such  a  policy 
are  so  great  as  to  justify  submitting  the  proposal  to  the 
people  for  their  consideration. 

MAINTENANCE  OF  OUR  INSTITUTIONS  OF 
HIGHER  LEARNING 

BY  CLARENCE  OUSLEY 

As  a  member  of  the  conference  for  education  in  Texas, 
during  several  years,  and  as  a  member,  first  of  the  board  of 
regents  of  the  College  of  Industrial  Arts,  and  then  of  the 
board  of  regents  of  the  University,  covering  in  the  aggre- 
gate a  period  of  about  fifteen  years,  I  gave  devoted  study 
to  the  subject  of  the  maintenance  of  our  institutions  of 
higher  learning.  I  was  aided  by  a  somewhat  elaborate  re- 
search by  Mr.  Arthur  Lefevre  and  by  investigations  con- 
ducted under  the  leadership  of  Mr.  Will  C.  Hogg.  As  a 
result  of  these  studies  and  as  a  result  of  my  experience  upon 
the  boards  of  control  of  these  two  institutions,  I  came  to  th«^ 
conclusion  that  a  specific  mill  tax  was  the  only  dependable 
method,  and  in  the  long  run  was  the  most  economical  meth- 
od, of  supporting  the  institutions. 

A  college  or  a  university  should  have  a  reasonable  as- 
surance of  a  definite  maintenance  over  a  long  term  of  years 
in  order  that  its  executive  officers  may  intelligently  plan 
for  its  development.  Such  planning  is  impossible  under 
the  present  system  of  fluctuating  and  uncertain  appropria- 
tions. I  believe  that  any  open-minded  man  who  studies 
the  subject  will  come  to  a  like  conclusion. 

There  is  some  difference  of  opinion  as  to  whether  the  mill 
tax  should  be  fixed  in  the  constitution  or  should  be  provided 
by  statute.  To  fix  it  in  the  constitution  would  make  it 
more  certain,  but  on  the  other  hand  a  constitutional  limita- 
tion would  make  it  rather  difficult  to  provide  for  new  in- 
stitutions or  to  make  the  adjustments  among  institutions 


A  Mill  Tax  for  Higher  Educational  Institutions        31 

as  population  increases  and  new  educational  needs  appear. 
Therefore  I  incline  to  the  view  that  the  more  expedient 
method  is  to  make  the  mill  tax  statutory.  Experience  in 
other  states  shows  that  where  a  mill  tax  is  set  up  by  statute 
it  is  rarely,  if  ever,  repealed. 

T.    H.    HARRIS,   STATE   SUPERINTENDENT   OF   PUBLIC   INSTRUC- 
TION OF  LOUISIANA 

I  am  very  strongly  of  the  opinion  that  the  constitution 
should  require  a  minimum  support  for  state  educational 
institutions.  The  constitutional  provisions  here  in  Louis- 
iana are  to  the  effect  that  the  state  university  shall  he  sup- 
ported from  July  1,  1922  until  January  1,  1925  out  of  the 
proceeds  of  a  two  per  cent  severance  tax  on  such  natural 
products  -as  oil,  gas,  sulphur,  lumber,  etc.,  up  to  a  maximum 
•of  five  million  dollars  for  the  period  mentioned,  and  further, 
that  the  Legislature  shall  have  authority,  at  its  discretion, 
to  make  any  additions  to  this  support.  After  January  1, 
1925,  the  University  is  guaranteed  a  minimum  support  of  a 
half  a  mill  tax  on  the  state  assessment.  On  present  values 
this  will  amount  to  about  one  million  dollars  a  year.  The 
Legislature  has  authority  to  add  to  this  tax  should  it  see 
fit  to  do  so. 

The  other  state  educational  institutions,  that  is,  normal 
schools,  etc.,  are  guaranteed  by  the  constitution  a  minimum 
support  of  $700,000  a  year  with  the  provision  that  the  Leg- 
islature may  make  such  additions  to  this  as  it  may  see  fit. 

My  opinion  is  that  these  constitutional  provisions  are 
very  wise.  I  have  been  around  legislatures  for  a  good  many 
years,  and  I  have  observed  that  when  a  Legislature  meets, 
all  of  the  interests  of  the  state  are  there,  and  that  tht-y  pre- 
sent their  claims  for  financial  support  very  strongly;  and 
unless  guaranteed  a  reasonable  support  to  the  schools  these 
institutions  frequently  stand  to  suffer. 

Those  in  charge  of  state  educational  institutions  mu^t 
make  plans  that  extend  through  several  years,  and  th^s  they 
can  not  do  unless  the  support  is  certain  and  permanent. 

We  find  that  this  is  also  true  of  the  public  schools  oroper. 


32  University  of  Texas  Bulletin 

The  constitution  guarantees  a  minimum  of  both  state  and 
local  support  which  is,  it  is  perfectly  safe  to  say,  materially 
larger  than  would  be  realized  by  the  public  schools  if  such 
a  provision  were  not  in  the  constitution. 

METHODS  OF  SUPPORT  FOR  THE  STATE  COLLEGES 

OF  TEXAS 

BY   ANNIE   WEBB   BLANTON,    STATE    SUPERINTENDENT   OF 
PUBLIC   INSTRUCTION 

In  my  opinion  the  best  method  of  supporting  the  state 
colleges  of  Texas  is  by  a  mill  tax  provided  for  in  the  con- 
stitution of  the  state. 

Our  constitution  and  statutes  place  the  government  of  our 
state  colleges  in  the  hands  of  the  boards  of  regents  of  these 
institutions.  Members  of  these  boards  serve  for  at  least 
six  years.  They  have  the  opportunity  of  becoming  familiar 
with  the  plans  of  work  and  with  the  merits  of  members  of 
the  faculty.  They  are  able,  through  their  knowledge  of  the 
institutions,  to  use  the  money  appropriated  for  their  sup- 
port, to  the  best  advantage.  With  the  multitudinous  other 
duties  forced  upon  their  attention  no  legislative  body  can 
do  this. 

Of  recent  years  the  state  Legislature  has  assumed  partly 
the  functions  of  the  board  of  regents.  Instead  of  appro- 
priating for  each  institution  what  the  Legislature  feels  that 
the  state  can  afford  to  give  to  the  school,  the  Legislature  has 
undertaken  to  regulate  every  detail  of  the  expenditures.  It 
has  placed  about  the  funds  appropriated,  such  rigid  restric- 
tions that  it  has  been  impossible  for  the  board  of  regents 
to  use  these  funds  to  the  best  advantage  of  the  school. 

By  this  system  the  boards  of  regents  can  not  recognize  or 
reward  merit  in  members  of  the  faculty,  and  the  feeling  has 
become  prevalent  in  the  state  schools  that  the  motto  that 
should  be  placed  above  their  doors — so  far  as  members  of 
the  faculty  are  concerned — is  "Ye,  who  enter  here  leave 
hope  behind." 

No  institution  can  develop  as  it  should  without  continuity 


A  Mill  Tax  for  Higher  Educational  Institutions        33 

of  plans  and  certainty  of  revenue.  It  is  uncertainty  of 
revenue  that  paralyzes  progress  in  our  state  institutions 
under  the  present  plan  of  legislative  appropriation  and  leg- 
islative dictation.  No  institution  should  be  absolutely  at 
the  mercy  of  political  conditions  and  political  influences. 
Petty  politics  has  for  years  produced  more  or  less  stagna- 
tion in  regard  to  school  advancement  in  Texas. 

By  placing  in  the  state  constitution  a  mill  tax,  the  pro- 
ceeds of  which  shall  be  justly  divided  among  the  various 
state  institutions,  and  by  placing  a  provision  in  the  consti- 
tution that  the  proceeds  of  this  tax  shall  be  appropriated  by 
the  Legislature,  the  funds  to  be  under  the  direction  of  the 
boards  of  regents  of  the  state  institutions,  we  shall  secure 
certainty  of  support  and  continuity  of  plans,  and  an  era  for 
higher  education  will  dawn  in  Texas. 

A  notable  instance  of  where  this  plan  is  followed  in  the 
Southern  States  is  the  state  of  Louisiana,  which  has  entirely 
removed  its  state  institutions  from  any  kind  of  financial 
domination  by  the  state  Legislature,  and  a  number  of  North- 
ern States  have  followed  this  plan.  I  am  attaching  here- 
with a  statement  as  to  the  methods  of  support  followed  in 
the  various  states. 

There  is  no  more  reason  why  our  state  schools  should  be 
dominated  by  having  their  expenditures  itemized  for  them 
by  the  Legislature  than  that  this  should  be  done  for  our 
city  schools.  A  large  city  school  system  spends  many  times 
the  amount  appropriated  for  most  of  our  state  schools.  Its 
revenues  are  absolutely  at  the  disposal  of  its  board  of  edu- 
cation, subject  only  to  restrictions  made  by  the  state  laws. 
Certainly  the  state  board  of  regents  is  equally  to  be  trusted 
with  the  city  board  of  regents.  The  attempt  to  dominate 
the  state  institutions  by  the  state  Legislature  has  been  the 
result  of  political  influences,  and  this  kind  of  practice  can 
be  stopped  only  by  changing  the  constitution  of  the  state  of 
Texas. 


34  University  of  Texas  Bulletin 

SUPPORT  OF  EDUCATIONAL  INSTITUTIONS  IN  THE 
UNITED  STATES 

BY   THE   STATE   DEPARTMENT    OF   EDUCATION 

In  view  of  the  fact  that  the  matter  of  a  special  tax  for 
Texas  state  colleges  is  now  under  discussion,  and  the  State 
Department  of  Education  has  been  called  upon  for  the  most 
recent  statistics  as  to  the  support  of  state  colleges  in  other 
states,  there  was  recently  sent  out  by  the  State  Superintend- 
ent of  Texas  to  the  state  superintendent  of  each  of  the  other 
states  of  the  union,  a  questionnaire  in  regard  to  the  method 
of  support  of  state  colleges  followed  in  that  state.  Replies 
have  been  received  from  all  of  these  except  Alabama,  Colo- 
rado, Maryland,  and  South  Carolina.  Facts  as  to  these  four 
states  were,  therefore,  gathered  from  their  most  recent  bi- 
ennial reports. 

These  replies  show  that  nearly  all  of  the  states  of  the 
union  have  some  kind  of  permanent  fund,  the  income  of 
which  goes  to  the  state  institutions  for  higher  education. 
In  addition,  these  institutions  receive  support  either  from  a 
mill  tax  or  from  legislative  appropriations. 

The  following  thirty  states  have  no  mill  tax,  and  their 
state  colleges  are  supported  chiefly  by  legislative  appropria- 
tions: Alabama,  California,  Connecticut,  Colorado,  Dela- 
ware, Florida,  Georgia,  Idaho,  Iowa,  Kansas,  Maryland, 
Massachusetts,  Mississippi,  Missouri,  Nebraska,  New  Hamp- 
shire, New  Jersey,  New  Mexico,  New  York,  North  Caro- 
lina, North  Dakota,  Oklahoma,  Pennsylvania,  Rhode  Island-, 
South  Carolina,  South  Dakota,  Texas,  Vermont,  Virginia, 
West  Virginia.  Of  these,  two  states,  Nebraska  and  North 
Dakota,  formerly  had  a  statutory  mill  tax,  for  the  support 
of  state  colleges,  but  this  provision  was  repealed. 

In  the  remaining  eighteen  states,  the  state  schools  have 
for  their  support  a  special  tax,  the  details  of  which  are 
summarized  below: 
Arizona:     Tax  of  one  mill  for  the  state  university,  to  be 

increased  next  year  to  one  and  three-tenths  mills. 
Arkansas:     Tax  of  one  mill  for  the  state  university;  tax 


A  Mill  Tax  for  Higher  Educational  Institutions        35 

of  six-tenths  of  one  mill  for  the  state  agricultural 
schools;  tax  of  two-tenths  of  one  mill  for  the  state 
normal  school ;  tax  of  one  and  two-tenths  mills  for  the 
eleemosynary  institutions ;  tax  of  two-tenths  of  one  mill 
for  vocational  education;  tax  of  twelve-hundredths  of 
one  mill  for  colored  normal. 

Illinois :  Tax  of  three  and  three-fourths  mills  for  the  state 
university  and  agricultural  college,  which  is  one  in- 
stitution. 

Indiana :  Tax  of  one-half  mill  for  colleges ;  of  the  proceeds 
of  this,  Indiana  University  receives  two-fifths,  Purdue 
University,  two-fifths,  and  the  state  normal  schools, 
one-fifth. 

Kentucky :  Tax  of  seven-fortieths  of  one  mill  for  the  state 
university;  tax  of  five-eighthieths  of  one  mill  for  each 
state  normal  school. 

Louisiana :  Severance  tax  for  the  state  university  until 
January  1,  1925.  This  is  two  per  cent  of  the  gross 
output  of  mineral  resources  severed  from  soil,  air,  or 
water,  such  as  gas,  oil,  sulphur,  salt,  etc.  After  Jan- 
uary 1,  1925,  the  constitution  sets  aside  an  annual  one- 
half  mill  tax  for  the  support  of  the  state  university. 
The  constitution  provides  that  not  less  than  $700,000 
per  year  shall  be  set  aside  for  the  normal  schools  and 
the  eleemosynary  institutions. 

Maine:  The  University  is  not  strictly  a  state  institution. 
A  state  tax  of  three  and  one-third  mills  is  levied  for 
educational  purposes  generally.  The  state  normal 
schools  and  public  elementary  and  high  schools  receive 
support  from  this  tax. 

Michigan :  Tax  of  three-fifths  of  one  mill  for  state  univer- 
sity; tax  of  one-fifth  of  one  mill  for  the  state  agricul- 
tural college. 

Minnesota:  Tax  of  twenty-three  hundredths  of  one  mill 
for  the  state  university.  The  agricultural  college  is  a 
part  of  the  university. 

Montana:  Tax  of  one  and  one-half  mills  for  all  state  in- 
stitutions. These  are  all  under  one  executive  head,  the 
chancellor,  and  no  specified  division  of  the  tax  is  made 
by  law. 

Nevada:  Tax  of  one  and  two-tenths  mills  for  state  uni- 
versity until  1925;  after  that,  one  and  three-tenths 
mills.  All  state  colleges  are  on  one  campus,  and  are 
included  in  the  university. 

Ohio:  Tax  of  125  thousandths  of  one  mill  for  buildings; 
legislative  appropriations  for  support.  Of  the  product 


36  University  of  Texas  Bulletin 

of  the  mill  tax,  72  per  cent  goes  to  the  Ohio  state  Uni- 
versity, which  includes  the  agricultural  college  and  nor- 
mal schools,  and  the  remainder  to  other  state  colleges. 

Oregon :  Tax  of  one  and  twelve  hundredths  mill  for  the 
agricultural  college;  tax  of  eighty-four  hundredths  of 
one  mill  for  the  state  university;  tax  of  one-tenth  of 
one  mill  for  the  state  normal  school. 

Tennessee:  Tax  of  one-half  of  one  mill  for  the  state  uni- 
versity; which  includes  the  agricultural  college. 

Utah:  Twenty-eight  per  cent  of  the  entire  property  tax 
goes  to  the  state  colleges.  Of  this,  the  state  university 
receives  64.43  per  cent;  the  main  agricultural  college 
receives  28.34  per  cent;  and  the  branch  agricultural 
college  receives  7.23  per  cent. 

Washington :  Tax  of  one  and  one-tenth  mills  for  the  state 
university;  tax  of  sixty-seven  hundredths  of  one  mill 
for  the  agricultural  college;  tax  of  1659  ten-thou- 
sandths of  one  mill  for  the  state  normal  school. 

Wisconsin :  Tax  of  three-eighths  of  one  mill  for  the  state 
university,  and  one-sixth  of  one  mill  for  the  normal 
schools. 

Wyoming:  Tax  of  one-half  of  one  mill  for  the  state  uni- 
versity, which  includes  the  agricultural  college  and 
normal  school.  Of  this,  one-eighth  of  one  mill  is  for 
buildings,  and  three-eighths  of  one  mill,  for  current 
expenses. 

JOSEPH    D.    SAYERS,   EX-GOVERNOR   OF   TEXAS 

I  strongly  favor  the  movement  to  secure  a  steady  and  an 
adequate  revenue  for  the  support  and  maintenance  of  the 
institutions  of  learning  as  named,  through  the  adoption 
of  a  constitutional  amendment  providing  for  the  levy  of  a 
special  tax  for  the  purpose;  upon  the  condition,  however, 
that  the  movement  does  not  contemplate  that  the  adminis- 
tration of  those  institutions  shall  be  independent  of  the 
legislative  and  executive  branches  of  the  government. 

It  has  been  a  long  and  well  established  principle,  based 
upon  experience,  that  it  is  indeed  dangerous  and  unwise, 
except  for  short  periods  and  under  exceptional  circum- 
stances, to  entrust  a  department  or  an  official  with  dis- 
cretionary power  in  the  use  and  disbursement  of  public 
funds. 


A  Mill  Tax  for  Higher  Educational  Institutions        37 

For  many  years  I  have  been  of  the  opinion  that  our  in- 
stitutions of  learning  should  be  maintained  through  a  spe- 
cial tax,  authorized  by  the  constitution  and  that  the  pro- 
ceeds arising  from  such  tax  should  be  kept  separately  from 
the  general  revenue.  Under  such  a  policy,  if  the  tax  rate 
be  sufficiently  large,  the  income  arising  therefrom  will  be 
steady  and  adequate  for  the  support  of  the  institutions  and 
would  increase  with  the  advancement  of  the  state  in  popu- 
lation and  material  resources. 

A  steady  and  an  adequate  income  I  regard  as  a  vital 
necessity  to  the  welfare  and  growth  of  an  educational  in- 
stitution, without  which  it  will  become  incapable  of  per- 
forming its  appropriate  functions  and  pursuing  a  career 
of  usefulness. 

Beside  the  advantage  that  would  certainly  accrue  to  the 
institutions  should  this  policy  be  adopted,  it  would  be  less 
difficult  for  the  Legislature  to  deal  with  its  appropriation 
measures  as  the  general  revenue  would  not  be  burdened 
with  these  institutions  whose  requirements  would  some- 
times be  greater  than  the  general  revenue  could  bear  with- 
out disregarding  the  rightful  wants  of  other  branches  of  the 
public  service.  At  no  period  in  our  history  has  there  been 
greater  need  for  the  exercise  of  intelligent  judgment  than 
at  the  present  time.  Problems  of  the  gravest  character 
and  affecting  our  political,  industrial,  commercial,  social 
and  domestic  life  continually  present  themselves  for  solu- 
tion. 

Propaganda,  as  well  for  evil  as  for  good  purposes,  flood 
the  country. 

Visionary  doctrines,  sometimes  emanating  from  authori- 
tative sources,  but  oftener  from  minds  without  an  exper- 
ience of  life  in  the  concrete,  are  sedulously  promulgated 
through  pamphlets  and  magazines. 

Public  opinion — often  the  opinion  of  classes  and  condi- 
tions— is  becoming  more  authoritative. 

The  distinction,  that  was  carefully  observed  and  main- 
tained in  the  exercise  of  federal  and  state  authority  in  other 
days,  is  rapidly  disappearing,  and  legislation  of  a  socialistic 
character  has  become  altogether  too  frequent. 


38  University  of  Texas  Bulletin 

Other,  and  as  convincing,  reasons  might  be  given  to  show 
the  urgent  need  of  popular  education.  Our  growth  in  pop- 
ulation and  material  resources  has  been  rapid  and  great; 
but  strength  and  wealth  will  not  compensate  for  the  lack 
of  knowledge. 

An  eminent  American  jurist,  in  a  public  address,  once 
said,  "We  must  educate,  we  must  educate,  or  we  will  perish 
by  our  own  prosperity." 

Having  assumed  the  duty  of  giving  to  the  people  every 
reasonable  opportunity  for  the  proper  education  of  their 
youth,  the  state  will  incur  a  grave  and  lasting  reproach, 
if  it  should  fail  to  rise  to  the  full  measure  of  its  respon- 
sibility. 

Though  not  called  for  in  your  note,  I  can  not  forbear  in- 
cluding in  my  reply,  and  as  an  integral  part,  the  sincere 
and  earnest  hope  that  the  Legislature  will,  in  its  considera- 
tion of  our  educational  affairs,  also  submit  an  amendment 
to  the  constitution  providing  for  an  increased  ad  valorem 
state  tax  for  the  support  of  the  common  free  schools. 

When  it  is  considered  that  fully  ninety  per  cent,  if  not  a 
larger  number,  of  the  youth  of  the  state  have  only  the  edu- 
cational advantages  that  the  graded  and  common  schools 
can  give  them,  and  that  they  will  be  called  upon  to  dis- 
charge the  duties  of  manhood  and  womanhood,  no  argument 
should  be  required  and  no  appeal  needed  to  induce  such 
action  as  will  put  these  schools  in  the  best  possible  condi- 
tion of  efficiency. 

There  should  not  be  a  failure  to  give  a  liberal  support  to 
each  and  all  of  our  institutions  of  learning — from  turret  to 
foundation. 

The  dissemination  of  knowledge  among  the  youth  of  the 
land  through  institutions  of  learning  has  become  as  neces- 
sary as  the  protection  of  life,  liberty  and  property,  so  long 
regarded  as  the  highest  governmental  function  and  duty. 

L.   D.    COFFMAN,    PRESIDENT    OF    UNIVERSITY    OF    MINNESOTA 

I  do  not  think  that  there  is  any  single  asitsf  actory  method 
of  support  for  higher  institutions  of  learning.  The  three 


A  Mill  Tax  for  Higher  Educational  Institutions        39 

sources  of  support  upon  which  state  universities  must  relv 
are: 

1.  The  mill  tax  or  direct  appropriations. 

2.  Tuitions  and  fees. 

3.  Endowments  and  gifts. 

The  advocates  of  the  mill  tax  have  insisted  that  the  in- 
come of  a  university  will  increase  automatically  as  the 
wealth  of  the  state  increases.  This  is  true  unless  there  is  a 
change  in  the  basis  of  assessment.  In  that  event,  the  actual 
amount  of  money  raised  by  taxation  may  be  increased  or 
decreased.  Even  though  the  income  of  the  university  does 
theoretically  increase  automatically  as  the  wealth  of  the 
state  increases,  it  does  not  follow  that  it  will  increase  as 
rapidly  as  the  educational  needs  of  the  institution  develop. 
It  has  been  the  experience  of  most  states  that  the  mill  tax, 
when  it  is  first  established,  is  entirely  too  low.  The  as- 
sumed actual  needs  of  the  university  at  the  time  the  law  is 
enacted  are  frequently  taken  as  the  basis  for  determining 
the  amount  of  the  rate.  No  millage  rate,  so  far  as  I  know, 
has  ever  been  established  as  the  result  of  an  actual  study 
of  the  educational  needs  of  a  developing  and  expanding 
university.  A  state  institution  that  must  rely  for  its  sup- 
port primarily  upon  money  raised  by  a  mill  tax  will  soon 
find  itself  lagging  behind  the  procession,  unless  it  is  able 
to  increase  the  rate  of  the  tax.  We  have  had  a  number  of 
interesting  illustrations  of  this  fact  in  recent  years. 

One  of  the  strongest  arguments  of  those  who  have  ad- 
vocated the  millage  tax,  as  over  against  a  direct  appropria- 
tion by  the  Legislature  for  the  maintenance  of  universities, 
has  been  that  it  made  it  unnecessary  for  the  representatives 
of  the  state  institution  to  go  biennially  to  the  Legislature 
for  funds.  It  was  assumed  that  the  institutions  were  thus, 
to  a  certain  extent,  removed  from  the  political  arena.  It 
gave  them  more  independence  and  freedom.  They  could 
devote  more  time  and  energy  to  teaching  and  research  and 
to  general  service  activities.  But  the  claims  are  not  wholly 
justified  because  the  amount  of  revenue  raised  annually 
by  a  millage  tax,  after  the  first  few  years,  is  seldom  enough 


40  University  of  Texas  Bulletin 

to  maintain  the  institution ;  and  a  campaign  to  increase  the 
rate  must  be  carried  on.  Of  course,  campaigns  to  raise 
money  are  biennial  affairs  with  those  institutions  that  must 
rely  on  direct  appropriations.  Institutions  that  are  forced 
to  rely1  chiefly  upon  direct  appropriations  have,  over  a  com- 
paratively long  period  of  time,  fared  just  as  well  as  institu- 
tions that  rely  primarily  upon  a  millage  tax  for  their 
support. 

When  state  institutions  were  first  established,  it  was  as- 
sumed in  most  cases  that  they  would  be  free.  Gradually, 
however,  this  notion  has  been  dispelled.  A  recent  study  of 
some  thirty-seven  state  institutions  shows  that  they  all 
charge  fees  of  one  kind  or  another,  and  that  these  fees  are 
used  to  support  teaching,  research,  to  purchase  equipment 
and  for  the  actual  operation  and  maintenance  of  the  insti- 
tution. Furthermore,  student  fees  are  constantly  increas- 
ing, both  in  number  and  amount.  This  is  due  directly  to 
the  increase  in  registration,  the  expensiveness  of  laboratory 
work  and  the  establishment  of  professional  schools.  It  is 
due,  indirectly,  to  the  fact  that  the  states  do  not  always 
provide  as  liberally  as  they  should  in  light  of  the  growing 
needs  of  their  universities.  Many  persons  are  now  asking 
themselves  whether  the  students  in  professional  schools 
should  not  be  required  to  pay  the  total  cost  of  their  educa- 
tion. The  truth  is  that  education  in  state  universities  is  nD 
longer  free.  The  fees  in  some  cases  are  becoming  almost 
prohibitive.  It  is  becoming  very  difficult  for  students  with 
limited  funds  to  secure  training  in  medicine  or  in  dentistry. 
The  purposes  for  which  technical  schools  were  first  estab- 
lished are  being  diverted  by  the  extent  that  state  institu 
tions  are  compelled  to  rely  upon  fees  and  tuitions  for  their 
support. 

No  state  university  can  expect  that  the  major  part  of  its 
support  will  come  from  endowments  or  gifts  although  the 
number  of  endowments  and  gifts  should  increase  in  the  near 
future.  Theoretically  the  graduates  of  state  institutions 
should  be  more  liberal  in  providing  gifts  for  the  universities 
from  which  they  have  graduated.  Actually,  there  is  some 


A  Mill  Tax  for  Higher  Educational  Institutions        41 

psychological  factor  in  the  situation  which  does  not  work 
this  way.  The  graduates  of  privately  endowed  universities, 
generally  speaking,  are  more  liberal  in  providing  gifts  than 
are  the  graduates  of  state  universities. 

It  is  obvious  to  every  student  of  higher  education  that  all 
state  institutions  will  soon  be  facing  a  crisis,  and  that  it  will 
either  be  necessary  for  them  .to  place  a  limit  upon  their 
registration  or  to  find  new  sources  of  income.  The  diffi- 
culty is  due  not  merely  to  the  growth  of  these  institutions, 
but  to  the  fact  that  we  are  clinging  in  most  states  to  an 
antiquated  system  of  property  taxation.  Every  one  recog- 
nizes that  much  of  the  wealth  of  this  country  is  sequestered 
or  legitimately  concealed  in  non-taxable  securities.  New 
sources  of  taxation  must  be  uncovered,  such,  for  example, 
as  income  taxes,  inheritance  taxes,  corporation  taxes,  taxes 
on  business  or  profits,  severance  taxes,  or  sales  taxes,  a  fair 
share  of  the  income  from  which  would  be  used  for  the  sup- 
port of  education. 

P.  P.  CLAXTON,  FORMER  UNITED  STATES  COMMISSIONER 
OF  EDUCATION 

1.  That  the  great  State  of  Texas  might,  purely  as  a  mat 
ter  of  business  and  because  of  the  increase  in  material 
wealth  which  it  would  bring,  give  to  all  its  institutions  of 
learning,  all  the  funds  which  they  need  for  their  support 
and  for  their  largest  possible  development  in  the  service 
of  the  state — this  apart  from  all  the  higher  values  of  good 
citizenship,  individual  culture  and  high  idealism,  which  are, 
of  course,  more  valuable  than  the  more  obvious  results  of 
material  prosperity.     Texas  has  unbounded  resources,  and 
a  population  strong,  virile  and  aggressive.     With  proper  ed 
ucation  and  training,  there  is  no  limit  to  the  possibilities 
of  its  wealth,  prosperity,  and  culture. 

2.  The  elementary  and  secondary  schools  will,  of  course 
be  supported  in  the  future,  as  in  the  past,  by  the  interest 
on  invested  funds,  by  appropriations  from  the  treasury  of 
the  state,  and  by  county  and  local  taxes.     With  proper  laws 
in  regard  to  taxation,  funds  may  easily  be  raised  thus  for 


42  University  of  Texas  Bulletin 

their  generous  support.  The  normal  schools  and  possibly 
the  College  of  Industrial  Arts  at  Denton  may  also  depend, 
I  think,  on  annual  or  biennial  appropriations  from  the 
treasury. 

It  is  not  so  clear,  however,  that  the  college  of  agricultural 
and  mechanic  arts  and  the  state  university  may  hope  to  re- 
ceive adequate  support  in  this  way.  Legislatures  are  more 
likely  to  play  politics  in  a  small  way  with  these  institutions 
than  with  the  elementary  or  high  schools  or  with  the  normal 
schools.  More  than  once  in  recent  years  the  welfare  and 
further  development  of  these  institutions  have  been  jeop- 
ardized by  the  failure  of  the  Legislature  to  make  necessary 
appropriations.  It  would  make  the  support  very  much 
ir?ore  certain  and  contribute  to  steady  and  adequate  d^velop- 
ment  of  the  university  and  the  agricultural  college  if  there 
were  levied  for  their  support  a  special  tax  sufficient  to  pro- 
vide for  their  up-keep  and  to  enable  the  trustees  to  put 
aside  money  for  buildings  from  time  to  time.  In  many 
states  in  which  the  income  of  the  higher  institutions  of 
learning  has  thus  been  assured,  they  have  been  relieved  of 
much  anxiety  and  have  proved  the  value  of  the  plan  by  their 
steady  and  sure  development  and  progress.  Another  rea- 
son for  the  adoption  of  this  plan  is  that  it  ties  up  the  for- 
tunes of  these  institutions  with  the  fortunes  of  the  state 
in  a  way  so  obvious  that  it  serves  as  an  incentive  to  them 
to  render  the  greatest  possible  service  to  the  state  in  its 
material  development  as  well  as  in  all  its  higher  interests. 

TEXAS  INSTITUTIONS  OF  HIGHER  LEARNING 

(Extract  from  an  address  before  the  Educational  Survey  Committee, 
April  21,  1922,  by  J.  A.  Hill,  President  of  West  Texas  Normal.) 

Should  provision  for  "adequate  support  and  maintenance" 
be  made  by  a  separate  tax  for  higher  educational  institu- 
tions, or,  should  it  continue  under  the  system  of  appropria- 
tions made  from  time  to  time  by  legislatures  ? 

There  is  no  doubt  that  we  greatly  need  a  more  dependable 
revenue  upon  which  to  project  our  building  programs.  To 


A  Mill  Tax  for  Higher  Educational  Institutions        43 

respond  to  the  growing  needs  of  a  great  state  like  Texas 
institutions  must  be  given  an  opportunity  to  develop  a  policy 
and  to  administer  it  without  interruption  from  trivial 
causes  and  temporary  social  or  economic  conditions.  They 
should  be  able  to  plan  in  advance  and  with  reasonable  cer- 
tainty each  year's  improvements  and  these  in  terms  of  a 
general  program  of  development  covering  a  long  pe  -iod  of 
years.  The  hit  and  miss  policy  which  we  are  now  pursuing 
would  soon  bankrupt  any  respectable  private  business  enter- 
prise. It  would  seem,  therefore,  that  the  mill  tax  might 
offer  a  reasonable  escape  from  the  evils  of  the  present  situa- 
tion. On  the  basis  of  present  property  values  it  would  bring 
a  revenue  of  some  three  and  one-half  millions  of  dollars 
which,  if  properly  distributed,  would  guarantee  a  steady 
and  fairly  adequate  income.  In  the  absence  of  a  better  plan 
and  conceding  that  an  equitable  division  of  the  proceeds 
can  be  agreed  upon  I  favor  a  mill  tax  for  the  support  of  a 
general  building  program. 

I  do  not  favor  a  mill  tax  for  the  payment  of  salaries  and 
other  current  expenses.  In  the  first  place,  it  wouM  not 
produce  sufficient  revenue  for  both  building  and  running 
costs.  A  comparison  of  the  appropriations  the  institutions 
of  higher  learning  have  received  in  any  recent  biennium 
with  the  amount  a  mill  tax  would  today  produce  is  all  the 
argument  that  is  needed  on  this  point.  If  all  of  our  Texas 
colleges  had  to  depend  on  the  three  and  one-half  million  dol- 
lars which  .a  mill  tax  would  produce,  the  future  would  hold 
slight  promise  for  our  system  of  higher  education. 

In  the  second  place,  I  am  not  absolutely  sure  that  admin- 
istrators and  college  professors  ought  to  feel  entirely  inde 
pendent  of  public  will  as  voiced  in  our  legislative  bodies. 
Official  responsibility  to  the  people's  chosen  representatives 
and  a  measure  of  financial  dependence  upon  public  approval 
help  us  to  keep  our  feet  on  terra  firma.  There  is  nothing 
so  purifying  to  one's  ambition  and  so  sobering  to  one's  judg- 
ment as  the  knowledge  of  the  watchfulness  of  the  public 
eye.  Moreover,  contact  with  the  Legislature  and  other  of- 


44  University  of  Texas  Bulletin 

ficial  departments  of  the  state  government  is  mutually  edu- 
cative and  facilitates  business  and  administrative  transac- 
tions. I  would  not  have  you  believe,  however,  that  I  ap- 
prove the  present  system  of  making  appropriations  in  which 
the  Legislature  undertakes  to  fix  the  salary  of  every  em- 
ployee from  president  up  to  janitor.  For  example,  it  hap- 
pens that  the  annual  and  monthly  salary  of  practically  all 
of  the  members  of  the  faculty  at  the  normal  colleges  is  writ- 
ten in  odd  cents — a  fact  which  requires  enough  ink,  energy, 
and  time  at  the  various  schools  to  pay  a  pretty  good  salary. 
Legislatures  are  not  competent  to  fix  with  just  discrimina- 
tion the  respective  salaries  of  all  the  state's  employees  and 
it  is  a  ridiculous  spectacle  to  see  them  undertake  it.  More- 
over, it  violates  the  law  which  prescribes  the  duties  of  the 
board  of  regents  and  is  likely  to  result  in  legislative  med- 
dling with  the  administrative  affairs  of  our  colleges.  In 
my  judgment,  the  president  of  the  institution,  the  board  of 
regents,  and  perhaps  the  board  of  control  should  agree  upon 
a  salary  schedule  after  the  president  and  regents  have  de- 
termined the  number  of  employees  needed.  This  should  be 
submitted  to  the  Legislature  which  should  have  authority 
through  the  appropriation  committee  to  call  for  detailed 
explanation.  If  this  committee  objects  to  any  item  and 
agreement  can  not  be  reached  thereon,  the  total  sum  to  be 
appropriated  should  be  so  modified  as  to  suit  the  commit- 
tee's objections  and  then  passed  as  a  lump  appropriation  for 
salaries  and  the  same  method  for  equipment  and  upkeep. 
I  do  not  consider  it  the  function  of.  the  Legislature  to  de- 
termine whether  Professor  Jones  should  be  paid  $3,173.331/3 
per  year,  or  $3,360.19.  If  legislatures  can  not  trust  college 
presidents  and  boards  of  regents  for  an  economic  and  honest 
administration  of  the  state's  affairs  then  I  fear  we  are  in 
poor  way  to  get  what  we  are  paying  for  in  the  field  of  higher 
education.  It  seems  to  me  the  legislators  could  better  in- 
vest their  time  and  their  talents  in  an  effort  to  work  out  an 
equitable  tax  system  that  would  give  the  people  what  they 
want  in  the  matter  of  schools.  This  is  not  to  be  understood 
as  a  criticism  of  members  of  the  Legislature,  but  of  the 


A  Mill  Tax  for  Higher  Educational  Institutions        45 

system  under  which  we  are  working.  Every  intelligent  cit- 
izen who  has  studied  the  question  of  taxation  knows  full 
well  that  as  it  is  now  applied  in  this  state  it  is  wholly  in- 
adequate to  our  needs,  unjust  and  dishonest  in  its  prin- 
ciples, and  exceedingly  wasteful  in  its  administration. 
Furthermore,  every  one  who  has  studied  the  question  knows 
that  we  can  never  have  a  satisfactory  school  system  in  this 
state  until  the  tax  problem  is  settled  in  such  a  way  that  the 
laws  of  the  state  will  be  in  accord  with  the  laws  of  right. 
Fundamentally,  our  school  problem,  from  whatever  aspect 
viewed,  is  a  problem  in  taxation  and  when  the  people  once 
comprehend  this  there  will  be  some  real  constructive  legis- 
lation in  Texas  that  will  vitalize  our  whole  educational 
system. 

In  the  absence  of  such  public  understanding  and  demand 
I  wish  to  submit  for  your  consideration  another  means  for 
the  support  and  maintenance  of  our  institutions  of  higher 
learning.  I  make  no  claim  to  originality  in  the  matter  and 
pass  over  the  question  as  to  how  it  could  be  worked  out. 
Inasmuch  as  all  the  institutions  are  in  dire  need  of  large 
funds  for  building  why  could  not  the  state  issue  bonds,  based 
upon  a  tax  levy,  for  a  long  period  of  time  and  enter  at  once 
upon  a  consistent  program  of  physical  expansion?  We  bond 
our  school  districts  because  it  is  not  right  for  the  present 
year  to  bear  all  the  building  expense  of  the  next  twenty  or 
thirty  or  fifty.  We  bond  our  cities  for  paving,  our  counties 
for  roads,  and  nobody  ever  raises  a  question  as  to  the  matter 
of  right  involved.  The  nation,  without  a  vote  of  the  people, 
issues  bonds  for  any  purpose  when  emergency  rises.  In 
fact,  such  a  procedure  has  become  the  established  policy  of 
the  whole  country.  If  it  is  right  and  expedient  that  inde- 
pendent school  districts,  cities,  and  counties  shall  bond 
themselves  for  their  permanent  improvements  why  is  it  not 
also  right  and  expedient  that  the  state  should  do  so?  A 
$40,000,000  five  per  cent  bond  issue  covering  a  period  of 
forty  years  would  require  a  tax  rate  sufficient  to  produce 
$2,000,000  in  interest  the  first  year,  and  $1,000,000  as  a 
sinking  fund.  This  would  be  a  very  small  rate  on  present 


46  University  of  Texas  Bulletin 

property  values  and  such  a  sum  spent  on  a  building  program 
covering  the  next  five  years  would  certainly  put  Texas  in- 
stitutions of  higher  learning  on  the  map  for  at  least  a  quar- 
ter of  a  century. 

CARL  C.  PLEHN,  PROFESSOR  OF  FINANCE,  UNIVERSITY  OF 
CALIFORNIA 

The  first  requisite  for  a  plan  of  support  of  a  state  univer- 
sity as  of  any  other  university  is  stability  of  income.  The 
second  is  steadiness  of  growth  of  income  keeping  pace  with 
the  growth  of  the  institution. 

Scholars  of  distinction  will  not  accept  appointment  unless 
assured  of  permanence  of  tenure  and  of  salary  with  due 
allowance  for  promotion  in  rank  and  salary.  Hence  the 
need  for  certainty  of  funds. 

For  a  state  university  three  plans  seem  possible,  with, 
of  course,  combinations  in  a  system  involving  parts  of 
each:  (1)  a  mill  tax;  (2)  an  appropriation  as  nearly  un- 
repealable  as  may  be;  (3)  student  fees. 

The  general  favor  accorded  the  mill  tax  arises  from  its 
assumed  stability  and  probable  regular  growth.  There  is 
also  the  expectation  that  once  granted  it  will  be  permanent. 
The  dangers  lie  in:  (1)  the  possibility  of  a  change  in  the 
general  tax  system;  (2)  in  a  possible  failure  of  assessed 
valuations  to  grow  as  fast  as  the  needs  of  the  institution 
grow;  (3)  the  difficulty  of  meeting  extra  needs  as  for 
buildings. 

An  appropriation  for  general  maintenance  can  not  very 
easily  be  given  that  degree  of  permanence  which  is  essen- 
tial. Although  for  ten  years  past  in  California  there  has 
been  such  an  appropriation  increasing  7  per  cent  each  year 
compounded  annually,  and  covering  a  large  part  of  the  reg- 
ular maintenance.  If,  however,  this  had  not  been  supple- 
mented by  additional  appropriations  it  would  have  been  in- 
sufficient. Since  there  is  no  state  ad  valorem  tax  there 
can  be  no  mill  tax  in  this  state,  hence  the  above  method  was 
adopted. 


A  Mill  Tax  for  Higher  Educational  Institutions        47 

Student  fees  have  a  large  following  and  no  little  equity. 
But  in  general  the  public  objects. 

There  is  something  to  be  said  in  favor  of  giving  the  in- 
heritance tax  to  the  university.  Argument  runs  that  the 
education  of  the  young  is  an  appropriate  use  of  the  estate  of 
a  decedent.  But  the  inheritance  tax  is  not  regular  in  yield 
and  unless  used  to  add  to  a  mill  tax  or  to  a  permanent  ap- 
propriation and  to  be  used  for  extras,  i.e.,  buildings,  etc., 
might  be  unsatisfactory.  Sometimes  when  large  estates 
fall  in  the  inheritance  tax  is  large,  in  other  years  it  may  be 
small.  It  would  be  quite  possible,  however,  to  provide 
some  system  of  averaging  the  inheritance  tax  and  arrang- 
ing to  accumulate  in  fat  years  a  fund  to  carry  over  the  lean 
years.  The  difficulty  would  be  to  put  such  a  plan  into  con- 
tract form. 

There  is  always  much  to  be  said  in  favor  of  budget  or 
legislative  control  of  university  appropriations  as  a  means 
of  keeping  the  institution  from  dry  rot.  But  as  stated 
above  this  defeats  its  purpose  if  it  results  in  a  repute  of 
instability,  because  scholars  of  distinction  will  not  accept 
appointment  when  a  state  budget  or  legislative  committee 
has  the  power  to  disturb  the  professor's  tenure. 

Personally  I  advocate  an  eclectic  scheme  with:  (1)  a  mill 
tax,  or  a  permanent  (growing)  appropriation  irrevocably 
allotted  to  instructors'  salaries;  (2)  supplementary  appro- 
priations for  building  and  other  special  needs  and  for  ad- 
ministration;  (3)  moderate  student  fees  devoted  to  cover- 
ing library,  infirmary,  laboratory  expenses  and  like  costs 
which  are  occasioned  directly  by  the  student,  or  can  be  more 
directly  allocated  to  the  student  than  can  instruction.  Such 
a  scheme,  if  administered  under  non-political  control  af- 
fords at  once  the  essential  stability  for  healthy  growth. 

SUPPORT  OF  STATE  INSTITUTIONS  OF  HIGHER 
LEARNING 

BY  HON.  LEONARD  TILLOTSON,  FORMER  MEMBER  OF  TEXAS 
LEGISLATURE 

Tho  measure  of  support  provided  for  education  is  a  just 


48  University  of  Texas  Bulletin 

criterion  of  the  progress  of  organized  society.  The  provi- 
sion made  by  a  state  for  the  support  of  its  educational  in- 
stitutions is  to  be  accepted  as  a  fair  expression  of  the  at- 
titude of  the  popular  sentiment  toward  educational  develop- 
ment in  its  varying  aspects.  Peculiar  as  it  may  seem,  the 
popular  attitude  may  be  comparatively  liberal  toward  the 
advancement  of  one  branch  of  education,  and  indicative  of 
more  or  less  indifference  to  the  advancement  of  other  forms 
of  educational  endeavor.  Not  only  in  this  state,  but 
throughout  the  Union,  it  may  be  said  that  the  sentiment 
of  the  masses  is  united  in  the  most  liberal  provision  for  the 
support  of  the  commori  schools.  This  is  but  a  natural  illus- 
tration of  the  fact  that  the  popular  sentiment  favors  neces- 
sary and  adequate  support  for  those  institutions  available 
to  all  classes  and  to  the  people  of  all  communities  alike.  In 
many  states  the  public  schools  are  accorded  liberal  support, 
while  the  higher  institutions  receive  indifferent  considera- 
tion. In  comparatively  few  of  the  states  may  it  be  as- 
serted, without  qualification,  that  the  popular  sentiment 
has  advanced  to  such  a  degree  and  crystallized  in  favor  of 
equally  liberal  provision  from  public  funds  for  the  support 
and  development  of  the  higher  educational  institutions  and 
the  public  schools.  In  fact,  we  are  never  likely  to  see  the 
same  measure  of  popular  approval  for  the  development  of 
the  higher  educational  institutions  that  is  expressed  in  be- 
half of  the  common  schools  of  the  country. 

There  are  two  phases  of  provision  for  the  support  of  the 
educational  interests  of  a  state.  The  first  is  the  measure  of 
the  support ;  its  adequacy  to  the  reasonable  requirements  of 
normal  growth  and  judicious  development;  and  the  second 
is  the  degree  of  permanency  given  to  the  provisions  for  sup- 
port, the  establishment  of  a  consistent  policy  in  adequately 
maintaining  each  educational  activity  authorized  by  the 
state. 

In  this  state  there  is  noticeable  indifference  to  the  meas- 
ure of  support  to  be  given  our  higher  institutions  of  learn- 
ing. There  is  also  noticeable  difference  in  the  attitude  to- 
ward different  higher  educational  institutions. 


A  Mill  Tax  for  Higher  Educational  Institutions        49 

Public  sentiment  on  the  subject  of  education  in  its  en- 
tirety is  always  undergoing  change.  This  is  particularly 
true  in  Texas.  Community  participation  in  public  school 
support  is  exerting  a  strong  influence.  We  are  likely  to 
find  that  provision  for  education  which  popular  sentiment 
would  approve  this  year,  would  not  be  considered  adequate 
provision  a  few  years  hence.  As  a  consequence,  the  char- 
acter of  provision  that  should  now  receive  popular  approval 
should  be  such  as  to  prove  readily  adaptable  to  future  re- 
quirements with  the  minimum  of  change  in  state  policy. 

The  policy  of  the  state  in  providing  for  the  support  of 
the  public  schools  and  for  the  support  of  the  higher  educa- 
tional institutions,  should  be  as  nearly  uniform  and  consist- 
ent as  is  practicable,  in  view  of  the  scope  and  character  of 
the  work.  No  greater  error  could  be  made  than  that  of  es- 
tablishing different  policies  in  the  support  of  the  public 
schools  and  the  higher  institutions.  If  Texas  is  to  advance 
its  educational  standard,  and  develop  institutions  of  higher 
learning  of  the  first-class  of  their  kind,  it  may  only  be  ac- 
complished by  and  through  the  most  intimate  identification 
of  the  higher  institutions  with  the  common  schools  of  the 
state.  It  is  the  common  appeal  of  educators  that  such  leg- 
islation be  enacted  as  will  remove  the  schools  from  politics. 
State  schools,  both  the  common  schools,  and  the  higher  in- 
stituti  -us,  will  never  be  wholly  removed  from  political  con- 
trol. It  is  not  to  be  expected  that  they  will  ever  be  placed 
in  such  an  attitude,  through  statutory  enactment  or  even 
constitutional  provision,  that  they  will  not  be  responsive 
to  the  popular  judgment.  It  would  be  unfortunate  for  the 
cause  of  state  education,  which  must  broaden  greatly  with 
the  years,  for  it  to  be  removed  from  the  free  and  ready 
expression  of  the  public  sentiment. 

Provision  for  education  in  Texas  should  embrace  a  com- 
plete revision  of  existing  policy,  beginning  with  the  re- 
writing of  Article  VII  of  the  Constitution.  Section  3  of 
Article  VII  should  be  amended  by  the  removal  of  the  limit 
which  may  be  assessed  for  the  maintenance  of  the  public 
schools,  and  the  Legislature  should  be  authorized  at  each 


50  University  of  Texas  Bulletin 

regular  session  to  provide  by  statute  for  the  levy  and  col- 
lection of  such  ad  valorem  tax  on  the  assessed  property 
valuations  of  the  state  as  may  be  found  necessary  to  main- 
tain the  schools  for  a  minimum  number  of  months,  whici 
public  sentiment  places  at  nine.  This  would  provide  a 
single  state  tax  for  maintenance  purposes.  It  would  cost 
the  people  less  than  the  dual  system  of  state  and  local  tax- 
ation now  in  existence.  It  would  eliminate  the  inequalities 
of  opportunity  for  education  among  the  public  schools,  by 
assuring  the  children  of  the  common  school  district  in  the 
country  the  same  chance  as  is  accorded  the  children  in  the 
city  schools.  Nothing  short  of  this  uniformity  of  support 
for  the  public  schools,  and  the  upbuilding  of  the  rural 
schools,  will  ever  establish  the  broad  foundation  essential 
for  the  greater  popularity  of  higher  education  in  the  state. 
It  may  be  asserted  without  contradiction  that  until  there 
is  no  longer  a  rural  school  problem  in  Texas,  sentiment 
favorable  to,  and  adequate  provision  for,  higher  education 
in  the  state  will  grow  all  too  slowly  and  prove  disappoint- 
ing. This  fact  demonstrates  the  intimate  relationship  ex- 
isting between  the  common  schools  and  the  higher  institu- 
tions; and  the  necessity  for  a  consistent  and  similar  policy 
in  their  support. 

In  harmony  with  the  suggested  change  in  Section  3  of 
Article  VII,  giving  to  the  Legislature  authority  to  period- 
ically adjust  the  tax  levy  to  the  needs  of  the  public  schools, 
assuring  to  the  school  support  the  flexibility  absolutely  es- 
sential to  respond  to  the  growing  scholastic  enumerations, 
those  sections  of  Article  VII  dealing  with  the  University, 
the  Agricultural  and  Mechanical  College,  and  the  Prairie 
View  Normal  School,  should  be  amended  to  give  to  the 
Legislature  the  authority  and  direction  to  make  provision 
for  the  support  of  the  higher  educational  institutions  of 
the  state  by  tax  levy  as  well  as  by  appropriation.  Such 
amendments  to  Article  VII  should  include  all  state  insti- 
tutions established  since  the  adoption  of  the  Constitution  of 
1876,  and  provision  be  made  for  their  participation  in  any 
tax  levy  that  might  be  provided. 


A  Mill  Tax  for  Higher  Educational  Institutions        51 

The  Thirty-sixth  Legislature  passed  House  Joint  Resolu- 
tion No.  29,  which  sets  out  in  detail  proposed  amendments 
to  Sections  10,  11,  12,  13,  14  and  15  of  Article  VII,  sug- 
gesting the  support  of  the  higher  schools  by  tax  levy  and  by 
appropriation.  Section  13  of  the  resolution  contains  the 
authority  for  the  proposed  tax  levy. 

In  many  states,  provision  for  the  support  of  the  higher 
institutions  has  been  made  by  the  establishment  of  a  mill 
tax.  That  is,  the  writing  of  a  provision  in  the  constitution 
for  a  specific  tax  to  be  annually  levied  and  collected  for  the 
exclusive  support  of  the  higher  educational  institutions. 
There  are  two  objections  to  be  advanced  to  the  mill  tax  in 
this  state.  The  first,  and  important  objection,  is  that  it 
tends  to  remove  the  state's  schools,  and  it  may  be  said  their 
educational  activities  and  their  development  and  advance- 
ment, from  the  ready  and  intimate  association  with  the 
popular  sentiment,  without  which  there  is  real  danger  of 
the  schools  and  the  public  moving  in  diverging  paths.  The 
second  objection  to  the  mill  tax,  is  really  embraced  in  the 
statement  respecting  the  first,  and  is  that  the  public  judg- 
ment will  not  approve  its  adoption,  at  least  at  this  time. 

There  is  no  advantage  to  the  educational  institutions  in 
the  constitutional  mill  tax  that  may  not  be  found  in  the 
specific  statutory  tax  levy.  On  the  other  hand,  there  are 
distinct  disadvantages  in  the  mill  tax  not  present  in  the 
tax  levy.  The  constitutional  mill  tax  is  an  inflexible  pro- 
vision. In  a  state  whose  educational  needs  are  expanding 
as  in  Texas,  constant  demands  would  have  to  be  made 
for  supplementary  appropriations,  and  the  public  believing 
the  mill  tax  in  the  constitution  afforded  adequate  support, 
might  look  unkindly  upon  the  additional  demands,  just  as  it 
was  for  a  long  time  difficult  to  get  a  large  part  of  our  people 
to  realize  that  the  permanent  public  school  fund  does  not 
provide  sufficient  revenue  for  the  support  of  the  public 
school  and  that  appropriations  must  be  made  to  supple- 
ment that  revenue.  A  special  tax  levy  directed  by  statute 
in  conformity  to  constitutional  authority,  for  the  support  of 
the  higher  institutions  of  learning  established  by  the  state 


52  University  of  Texas  Bulletin 

would  not  be  looked  upon  by  the  people  as  a  finality  in  sup- 
port, as  would  be  the  case  of  a  fixed  constitutional  tax,  and 
supplementary  appropriations  would  be  accepted  as  a  nat- 
ural accompaniment  to  the  policy.  The  Legislature  could 
fix  the  tax  levy  for  the  support  of  the  higher  institutions 
from  time  to  time,  we  will  say,  about  every  third  legislative 
session,  the  needs  accruing  through  growth  to  be  cared  for 
by  supplementary  appropriation  at  intervening  sessions. 
Only  through  some  such  policy  as  a  specific  tax  levy  by  the 
Legislature  from  time  to  time,  supplemented  by  appropria- 
tion from  the  general  revenues  as  occasion  demands,  may 
the  support  of  our  higher  educational  institutions  be  main- 
tained upon  a  flexible  basis  capable  of  being  made  adequate 
at  all  times,  without  change  of  policy,  and  without  the  in- 
troduction of  legislative  expedients  that  give  rise  to  contro- 
versy and  result  in  materially  hampering  the  state's  edu- 
cational development.  The  people  are  naturally  jealous  of 
their  right  to  maintain  constant  contact  with  and  supervi- 
sion over  those  institutions  and  agencies  supported  from 
the  public  funds,  and  in  the  end  it  will  be  found  the  wiser 
policy  to  adopt  such  plan  of  support  for  the  institutions  of 
learning  as  will  serve  to  keep  the  public  mind  alive  to  and 
abreast  of  the  growing  requirements  of  education.  The 
public  will  benefit  from  such  policy,  and  in  the  measure  the 
public  receives  a  benefit  will  the  educational  institutions  be 
advanced  and  developed. 

EXPENDITURES    FOR    BROADER    EDUCATION    IN 
TEXAS    AS    COMPARED    WITH    WISCONSIN 

BY  TOM  FINTY,  JR.,  PUBLISHED  IN  THE  DALLAS  NEWS  IN 

1911 

I  wish  it  understood,  however,  that  it  is  not  my  desire 
nor  purpose  to  belittle  the  educational  institutions  of  Texas 
nor  to  convey  the  impression  that  they  are  not  doing  worthy 
work.  Upon  the  contrary,  it  is  my  profound  conviction 
that  the  University  of  Texas  and  the  Agricultural  and  Me- 
chanical College  of  Texas — these  combining  functions  cor- 
responding to  the  University  of  Wisconsin — are  doing  a 


A  Mill  Tax  for  Higher  Educational  Institutions        53 

tremendously  important  work  for  this  state,  and  that  they 
have  done  surprisingly  well  considering  the  investment  and 
the  funds  devoted  to  their  support. 

It  must  be  apparent,  however,  from  what  I  have  already 
written  that  the  people  of  Texas  are  not  deriving  anything 
like  as  much  corresponding  benefit  from  their  chief  edu- 
cational institutions  as  do  the  people  of  Wisconsin  from 
their  state  university,  and  we  can  put  over  against  that 
statement  of  fact  that  the  people  of  Texas  have  not,  upon 
any  basis  of  comparison,  devoted  as  much  money  to  the 
support  of  such  educational  work  as  have  the  .people  of 
Wisconsin.  Here  we  have  both  cause  and  effect  in  a  nut- 
shell. 

Paying  the  Fiddler 

We  can  not  make  the  University  of  Texas  "an  institution 
of  the  first  class,"  as  the  fathers  of  Texas  said  it  ought  to 
be,  merely  by  saying  that  it  is  such.  If  we  desire  to  receive 
from  it  a  quantum  of  beneficial  results  balancing  with  those 
received  by  the  people  of  Wisconsin  from  their  university; 
if  we  would  have  it  reach  all  of  the  people,  benefiting  them 
in  the  present,  it  is  patent  that  we  must  give  it  the  same 
character  of  support  as  the  people  of  Wisconsin  give  to  their 
university.  "By  University  of  Texas,"  when  used  in  a  com- 
parative sense  throughout  this  article,  I  mean  also  to  include 
the  A.  and  M.  College  of  Texas. 

We  can  hardly  claim  that  the  difference  is  due  to  wide 
dissimilarity  of  conditions,  nor  to  the  fact  that  Texas  is  a 
"new  state."  It  is  not  a  spring  chicken  as  compared  with 
other  Western  States. 

Texas  became  a  republic  in  1836.  At  that  time  it  had 
57,040  inhabitants.  Wisconsin  was  formed  as  a  territory 
of  the  United  States  in  1836.  It  had  at  that  time  22,000 
inhabitants,  one-half  of  whom,  it  is  estimated,  were  within 
the  territory  now  comprised  in  the  state. 

Texas  was  admitted  as  a  state  in  1846 ;  Wisconsin  in  1848. 

The  Congress  of  the  United  States  in  giving  Wisconsin 
territorial  government  provided  for  the  establishment  of  a 


54  University  of  Texas  Bulletin 

university,  but  the  university  was  not  established  until  the 
state  was  created  in  1848. 

The  Congress  of  the  Republic  of  Texas  provided  for  the 
establishment  of  a  university,  and  the  university  was  given 
a  large  land  endowment,  but  the  institution  was  not  estab- 
lished until  1882. 

Texas  at  the  census  of  1910  had  3,896,542  inhabitants, 
and  Wisconsin  2,333,860.  Both  have  large  undeveloped 
areas, 

Manner  of  Support 

To  make  a  comparison  of  the  support  given  the  chief  edu- 
cational systems  of  the  two  states  is  rather  difficult,  for 
the  fiscal  systems  of  the  states  widely  differ.  In  Wisconsin 
the  university  is  provided  for :  first,  by  a  direct  tax,  levied 
by  the  Legislature  for  a  term  of  years,  so  that  the  officers 
of  that  institution  may  make  plans  for  the  future,  certain 
of  resources  with  which  to  carry  them  out;  secondly,  by 
permanent  appropriations,  for  certain  purposes,  provided 
for  by  general  laws ;  third,  by  special  appropriations  contin- 
uing through  as  many  years  as  may  be  necessary.  For  ex- 
ample, in  the  case  of  a  building  which  it  may  require  five 
years  to  construct,  the  Legislature  provides  for  an  annual 
appropriation  for  each  of  five  years.  In  addition  the  uni- 
versity has  its  income  from  investment,  and  its  agricultural 
fund  from  the  federal  government. 

In  Texas  the  university  has  its  income  from  the  invest- 
ment and  from  appropriations  by  the  Legislature.  The  A. 
and  M.  College  has  its  funds  from  the  federal  government 
and  by  legislative  appropriation.  Under  our  c6nstitution 
appropriations  can  not  be  made  at  one  time  to  extend  for 
more  than  two  years.  Obviously,  this  provision  alone  places 
our  institutions  at  disadvantages. 

In  presenting  the  figures  below  given,  it  seems  fitting  to 
say  that  the  item  of  fees  and  farm  sales  in  the  accounts  of 
the  University  of  Wisconsin  ought  not  be  fully  considered 
in  comparison  with  the  Texas  accounts  which  are  kept  on  a 


A  Mill  Tax  for  Higher  Educational  Institutions        55 

different  basis.  In  this  comparison  the  income  of  the  Uni- 
versity of  Texas  and  the  Agricultural  and  Mechanical  Col- 
lege of  Texas  are  consolidated,  for  the  reason  that  the  Uni- 
versity of  Wisconsin  also  includes  the  agricultural  college 
of  that  state. 

Comparison  of  Income 

The  income  of  the  University  of  Wisconsin  in  the  aggre- 
gate is  approximately  $2,000,000  per  annum,  or  86  cents 
for  each  inhabitant  of  the  state;  of  Texas  approximately 
$875,000  per  annum  for  both  university  and  A.  and  M.  Col- 
lege, or  20  cents  per  inhabitant  of  the  state. 

Wisconsin  University  had  a  very  small  public  land  en- 
dowment ;  Texas  University  had  a  large  one.  Texas  income 
from  rentals  and  interest  is  seven  times  as  large  as  that  of 
Wisconsin. 

The  income  of  Wisconsin  University  from  taxation  is 
more  than  double  that  of  Texas  University  and  A.  and  M. 
College  from  the  same  source,  in  fact  more  than  double  the 
Texa3  income  from  taxation  and  from  rentals  and  interest 
combined. 

Appropriations  derived  from  taxation  for  the  support  of 
the  University  of  Wisconsin  are  73  cents  per  capita  of  the 
inhabitants  per  annum;  in  Texas  17  cents. 

Figures  in  Parallel 

Here  are  the  figures  for  the  last  biennium  and  the  present 
biennium,  the  latter  in  part  estimates: 

Last  Biennium 

Texas  Wisconsin 

Total    income    $1,686,689  $3,623,445 

From   taxation    1,162,900  2,717,197 

Rentals    and    interest 289,025  42,316 

From  United   States  Government 152,263  129,000 

Fees,    etc 82,501          

Fees  and  sales  from  farm 734,931 


56  University  of  Texas  Bulletin 

Present  Biennium 

Texas  Wisconsin 

Total    income    $1,790,872  $4,307,247 

From   taxation    1,308,905  3,401,000 

Rentals    and    interest 288,000  42,316 

From    United    States    Government....           143,967  129,000 

Fees,    etc 51,000         

Fees  and  sales  from  farm 734,931 

Perhaps,  in  order  that  the  comparison  should  be  entirely 
fair,  we  should  add  to  the  Texas  figures  the  expenditures 
upon  account  of  the  College  of  Arts  for  Girls,  the  work  of 
which  parallels  in  part  to  that  of  the  University  of  Wiscon- 
sin. The  appropriations  for  this  college  were  for  the  last 
biennium  $76,680  and  for  the  present  biennium  $168,950 


k  Certainty  of  Income 

It  will  be  seen  from  the  foregoing  that  the  University  of 
Wisconsin  not  only  has  a  much  larger  income  than  have  the 
institutions  of  Texas  engaged  in  like  work,  but  also  that  it 
has  greater  certainty  of  income.  It  has  a  larger  plant  and 
more  equipment  and  a  larger  staff.  Its  salaries  are  higher. 
Texas  University  every  now  and  then  loses  a  good  man 
because  of  the  inability  to  pay  better  salaries. 

A  RESOLUTION  BY  THE  EX-STUDENTS'  ASSOCIA- 
TION OF  THE  UNIVERSITY  OF  TEXAS 

To  the  Members  of  the  Senate  and  House  of  Representa- 
tives. 

At  a  meeting  of  the  Ex-Students'  Association  represent- 
ing more  than  20,000  ex-students  of  the  University  of  Texas, 
and  of  other  friends  of  education  in  Texas,  the  following 
resolution  was  unanimously  adopted,  and  we  are  directed 
to  submit  it  to  your  honorable  bodies. 

Reposing  full  confidence  in  both  branches  of  this  Legis- 
lature and  with  full  assurance  that  neither  the  Senate  nor 


A  Mill  Tax  for  Higher  Educational  Institutions        57 

the  House  has  any  purpose  to  take  any  action  that  will 
injure  the  University  of  Texas  or  impair  its  efficiency  and 
usefulness  to  the  people  of  the  state,  we  nevertheless  re- 
spectfully but  earnestly  protest  against  the  recent  action 
taken  by  the  House  on  the  University  appropriation  bill, 
especially  in  sustaining  what  is  known  as  the  Bonham 
Amendment,  and  in  support  of  this  protest  we  respectfully 
submit  the  following: 

I 

Salary  Reductions 

The  salary  standard,  as  adopted  by  the  Board  of  Regents 
and  embodied  in  the  appropriation  of  the  Thirty-sixth  Leg- 
islature at  the  first  called  session,  provided  for  a  maximum 
annual  salary  of  $4,000  for  a  full  professor.  It  was  not 
intended  at  that  time  to  fix  the  maximum  limit,  but  it  was 
contemplated  and  recognized  as  necessary  that  at  the  next 
session  of  the  Legislature  the  Board  of  Regents  would  be 
authorized  to  increase  the  maximum  to  probably  $5,000. 
Because  of  conditions  that  arose  during  the  war,  the  Board 
of  Regents  asked  the  Legislature  for  authority  immediately 
to  increase  the  salary  standard  at  the  University  of  Texas 
so  that  the  maximum  salary  of  a  full  professor  would  be 
$5,000  a  year.  This  was  intended  as  a  permanent  increase 
by  the  University  authorities. 

The  increase  allowed  was  $143,144  for  necessary  increases 
in  salaries,  and  $63,105  for  necessary  additions  to  the  staff 
for  the  past  year.  These  two  items  added  to  the  total  car- 
ried by  the  general  appropriation  bill  for  salaries  at  the 
Main  University,  $585,930,  make  a  total  of  $792,179  which 
the  Board  of  Regents  had  available  from  the  general  rev- 
enue for  salaries  at  the  Main  University  for  the  past  scho- 
lastic year. 

The  bill  as  reported  by  the  joint  committee  of  the  present 
House  and  Senate,  and  as  adopted  by  the  Senate,  provides 
a  total  of  $791,000  per  year  for  salaries  for  the  ensuing  two 
years.  The  Bonham  Amendment  as  adopted  in  the  House 
carries  a  total  for  salaries  at  the  Main  University  for  the 


58  University  of  Texas  Bulletin 

same  period  of  $444,527  per  year  for  salaries  at  the  Main 
University. 

That  there  is  no  necessity  for  cutting  $425,000  from  the 
University  budget  in  order  to  stay  within  the  state's  esti- 
mated revenue  for  the  next  two  fiscal  years  is  made  abso- 
lutely plain  by  the  statement  of  Chairman  Satterwhite  of 
the  appropriations  committee  appearing  in  the  Austin 
Statesman  of  this  date  (which  we  quote  with  full  confi- 
dence) to  the  effect  that  by  allowing  all  that  is  carried  in 
general  appropriations  as  adopted  embraced  in  the  com- 
mittee report,  the  state  at  the  end  of  the  fiscal  year  August 
31, 1922,  would  have  $3,155,640  to  the  good,  while  at  the  end 
of  the  fiscal  year  August  31,  1923,  there  would  be  an  esti- 
mated surplus  of  $7,210,000. 

Any  such  reductions  or  any  reductions  below  the  standard 
now  in  force  is  not  permissible  if  the  University  is  to  secure 
and  hold  competent  professors.  This  is  evident  from  the 
fact  that  in  all  of  the  western  states  at  all  comparable  in 
size,  population,  and  wealth  with  the  State  of  Texas,  that 
is,  the  states  of  California,  Iowa,  Illinois,  Michigan,  Minne- 
sota, Wisconsin,  and  Ohio,  the  maximum  salaries  of  full 
professors  average  over  $6,000,  while  the  present  maximum 
in  the  University  of  Texas  is  only  $5,000;  and  the  average 
maximum  salary  of  nine  privately  endowed  institutions,  in- 
cluding two  in  the  State  of  Texas,  is  $6,944. 

The  statement  made  in  some  quarters  that  the  average  of 
maximum  salaries  is  less  than  $3,500  is  unfair,  because  the 
average  is  obtained  by  including  scores  of  colleges  that  do 
not  aspire  to  the  standards  of  the  University  of  Texas. 
Manifestly  a  fair  comparison  can  only  be  made  between  in- 
stitutions of  like  character  and  doing  like  work. 

II 

No  Increase  Provided  For 

Let  it  be  borne  in  mind  that  even  on  the  basis  of  the  bill 
as  adopted  by  the  Senate  there  is  no  provision  for  increase 


A  Mill  Tax  for  Higher  Educational  Institutions        59 

in  the  teaching  staff  to  make  provision  for  increase  in  at- 
tendance shown  by  past  experience  to  be  approximately  11 
per  cent  compounded. 

Ill 

Summer  School 

The  practical  effect  of  the  Bonham  Amendment  is  to 
abolish  the  summer  school.  It  is  manifest  that  such  will  be 
the  result  if  the  amendment  should  finally  prevail,  for  the 
reason  that  it  was  intended  that  this  department  would  be 
maintained  and  carried  on  through  the  means  of  the  avail- 
able fund  of  the  University,  which,  under  this  action  of  the 
Senate  would  be  at  the  disposal  of  the  regents  for  such  pur- 
pose. Under  the  amendment  the  available  fund  can  not 
be  used  by  the  regents  except  for  building  purposes,  there- 
fore it  follows,  there  being  no  specific  appropriation  for  the 
summer  school,  that  it  must  fail  if  such  amendment  finally 
prevails. 

The  disastrous  effect  of  eliminating  the  summer  school 
from  the  work  of  the  University  is  obvious.  It  is  perhaps 
the  most  important  single  factor  in  the  service  of  the  Uni- 
versity to  the  people.  In  the  present  year  there  were  2,300 
students  in  the  first  term  and  1,284  in  the  second,  coming 
from  all  parts  of  the  state.  Most  of  them  are  teachers  or 
students  preparing  to  teach  in  the  city  or  rural  schools. 
We  have  said  that  it  is  perhaps  the  most  important  single 
factor  of  university  work,  because  through  it  the  teachers 
from  the  rural  districts,  now  some  2,300  in  number,  attend 
this  school  and  the  best  thought  and  inspiration  of  the  Uni- 
versity is  carried  directly  back  to  the  rural  schools  and  to 
the  pupils  who  attend  them.  Any  action  which  through 
lack  of  appropriation  deprives  the  people  of  this  vital  aid 
to  education  is  of  necessity  disastrous  to  the  best  interest 
of  the  state. 


60  University  of  Texas  Bulletin 

IV 

Bureau  of  Extension 

The  right  and  authority  to  control  the  general  available 
fund  of  the  University  being  taken  from  the  regents  and 
no  other  provision  being  made  for  the  Bureau  of  Extension, 
it  also  must  fail  and  with  it  will  fall  another  most  important 
branch  of  University  work  as  shown  by  the  following  brief 
review  of  the  work  it  has  done  in  the  past. 

Number  of  people  reached  during  1920-21,  more  than  one 
million.  Correspondence  courses  given,  2400,  mostly  to 
teachers.  Package  libraries  distributed,  7536,  covering  600 
subjects  and  distributed  to  222  counties,  mostly  in  smaller 
towns  and  rural  communities. 

Visual  instruction  slides  in  actual  service,  12,000,  in- 
cluding historical  and  geographical  groups  for  Texas  schools 
and  on  the  wild  flowers  of  Texas,  distributed  to  every  cor- 
ner of  the  state.  Lectures  to  accompany  the  slide  sets  are 
prepared  by  experts  on  the  various  lines  represented. 

Home  economics,  number  of  peop?e  reached  through  child 
welfare  clinics,  health  lectures,  and  development  of  home 
and  school,  more  than  15,000,  mostly  school  children,  teach- 
ers, and  parents. 

These  figures  do  not  include  the  many  thousands  reached 
by  bulletins,  letters,  and  printed  matter  in  general  of  the 
bureau. 

This  takes  no  account  of  the  many  thousands  reached  by 
the  University  Interscholastic  League. 

y 

Bureau  of  Economic  Geology 

The  Bureau  of  Economic  Geology  and  Technology  which 
is  in  like  manner  abolished,  has  helped  to  develop  the  re- 
sources of  the  state  and  is  estimated  to  have  attracted  cap- 
ital and  to  have  induced  the 'development  of  the  resources 


A  Mill  Tax  for  Higher  Educational  Institutions        61 

of  the  State  of  Texas  in  amount  greater  than  the  total  ex- 
pended for  the  University  from  fU  beginning.  It  has  lo- 
cated and  investigated  deposits  of  oil,  potash,  kaolin,  fullers 
earth,  quicksilver,  manganese,  sulphur,  coal,  and  iron.  The 
abolition  of  this  department  will  be  a  disaster  to  the  state. 
It  is  not  necessary  to  remind  the  Legislature  that  the  con- 
stitutional mandate  and  the  will  of  the  people  of  Texas  as 
well  demand  that  the  state  shall  have  a  University  of  the 
first  class.  We  respectfully  submit  that  legislative  action 
which  prevents  the  University  from  obtaining  talent  to  fill 
its  professorships  in  competition  with  other  institutions  of 
like  rank  prevents  it  from  reaching  the  children  of  the  rural 
schools  through  the  teachers  that  attend  the  summer  school 
and  the  people  at  large  through  its  Extension  Department, 
and  that  prevents  its  aid  to  people  of  the  state  in  the  devel- 
opment of  its  physical  resources  through  its  Department  of 
Economic  Geology  and  Technology  practically  eliminates 
it  from  the  category  of  a  university  of  the  first  class  and 
materially  impairs  u  not  substantially  destroys  the  purpose 
of  its  creation. 

We,  therefore,  submit  with  confidence  the  issue  of  the 
future  of  the  University,  believing  that  the  patriotic  mem- 
bers of  the  Legislature  will  see  that  the  will  of  the  fore- 
fathers shall  be  carried  out  and  a  university  of  the  first 
class  be  maintained. 

D.  A.  FRANK,  Dallas 
DAYTON  MOSES,  Fort  Worth 
ASHER  SMITH,  Laredo 
A.  M.  FRAZIER,  Hillsboro 
Miss  LULA  HOGG,  Fort  Worth 
LINTON  S.  SAVAGE,  Corpus  Christi 
ERNEST  THOMPSON,  Amarillo 
GEO.  C.  HOLMGREEN,  San  Antonio 
JOHN  W,  BRADY,  Austin 
W.  D.  CALDWELL,  Fort  Worth 
MRS.  D.  C.  WEBB,  Fort  Worth 
L.  A.  CARLTON,  Houston 

Resolutions  Committee 


62  University  of  Texas  Bulletin 

Extracts  from  "A  Tentative  Report  to  the  Virginia  Education  Com- 
mission on  a  Mill  Tax  for  the  Educational  System  of  the  State." 
By  Chas.  G.  Maphis,  Secretary,  Charlottesville,  Va.,  October 
7,    1910.      (Bulletin    of   the   Virginia    Department    of 
Education,  1912.) 

There  are  four  methods  of  support  now  being  used : 

(1)  Biennial  appropriations. 

(2)  Annual  appropriations  for  a  term  of  years. 

(3)  An  appropriation  of  a  fixed  percentage  of  the  total 
gross  revenues  of  the  state. 

The  latter  method  is  used  in  but  one  state — Tennessee. 

It  is  my  belief  that  an  appropriation  based  on  property, 
commonly  called  a  mill  tax,  is  the  best  of  these  methods. 

Sixteen  states  have  adopted  this  method  of  support  for 
one  or  more  of  their  educational  institutions,  and  twenty- 
one  out  of  eighty-three  state  universities  and  other  institu- 
tions of  higher  education  are  supported  in  whole  or  in  part 
by  a  mill  tax. 

Summarized  and  briefly  stated,  the  arguments  for  the 
mill  tax  method  of  support  are  as  follows : 

1.  Experience  proves  that  the  millage  method  is  the  best 
one.     Sixteen  of  the  most  progressive  states,  supporting 
twenty-one  of  the  most  prosperous1  institutions,  have  adopt- 
ed it,  and  after  having  an  experience  with  it,  pronounce  it 
the  best. 

2.  It  enables  the  institutions  or  system  thus  supported 
to  have  a  fixed  policy  which  shall  be  in  force  for  an  indefinite 
period,  and  to  make  far-seeing  and  wiser  plans  for  future 
growth  and  needs.     No  consistent  educational  policy  can  be 
carried  out  without  some  degree  of  dependence  upon  a  cer- 
tain income.     The  administrative  officers  must  have  some 
reasonable  anticipation  of  the  funds  which  can  be  com- 
manded for  use,  if  they  are  to  plan  wisely  and  economically. 

Private  institutions  have  an  endowment  and  hence  an 
assured  income,  which,  while  not  often  sufficient,  is  always 
certain.  The  mill  tax  amounts  to  a  permanent  endowment 
with  the  state  behind  it. 

3.  It  produces  a  constantly  increasing  revenue,  while 


A  Mill  Tax  for  Higher  Educational  Institutions        63 

private  endowments,  desirable  and  helpful  as  they  are,  pro- 
duce decreasing  returns  on  account  of  lower  rates  of  in- 
terest. 

The  revenue  from  a  mill  tax  is  certain  to  grow  somewhat 
from  year  to  year  and  to  grow  very  considerably  when  long 
periods  of  time  are  taken  into  consideration.  In  Minnesota, 
for  instance,  it  has  doubled  in  the  last  ten  years. 

Experience  in  other  states  has  shown  that  the  amount 
of  revenue  will  increase  with  the  increase  in  the  wealth  of 
the  state  and  in  proportion  to  the  growth  and  needs  of  the 
school  system.  It  does  not  always  keep  up  with  them, 
but  nearly  every  state  which  has  had  a  mill  tax  for  any 
length  of  time  has  not  only  continued  it,  but  has  increased 
it,  one  or  more  times  as  the  needs  have  demanded.  A  fixed 
appropriation  continually  becomes  inadequate,  and  it  is  diffi- 
cult to  get  it  increased. 

4.  It  gives  stability  to  the  business  efforts  of  a  school 
system,  which  could  not  be  expected  at  all  if  it  depended 
on  annual  or  biennial  presentation   of  the  needs   of  the 
Legislature. 

5.  It  provides  a  stable  support  in  times  of  financial  de- 
pression and  eras  of  politicalism,  such  as  we  had  in  1879, 
when   the   total    school    revenue    fell  |from    $1,000,000    to 
$512,000,  and  is,  therefore,  a  scientific  and  practical  method 
of  support. 

6.  It  prevents  constant  and  undignified  lobbying  through- 
out the  session  of  the  Legislature,  and  avoids  the  unseemly 
biennial  scrambles  and  unpleasant  rivalry  among  the  sev- 
eral state  institutions  before  the  legislative  committee. 

7.  It  saves  much  time  and  annoyance  to  the  legislators 
themselves  by  relieving  them  of  the  importunities  of  a  most 
persistent  and  numerous  class  of  lobbyists,  and  prevents 
"log-rolling"  and  "wire-pulling"  among  representatives  of 
different  parts  of  the  state  when  one  institution  is,  as  it 
usually  is,  played  against  another  located  in  a  different  part 
of  the  state.     These  rivalries  often  lead  to   unnecessary 
duplication  of  work  intended  only  to  appeal  for  an  appro- 
priation. 


64  University  of  Texas  Bulletin 

8.  It  adds  to  the  dignity  and  self-respect  of  the  school 
men  themselves  by  relieving  them  of  the  necessity  of  en- 
gaging in  this  unwilling,  unpleasant,  but  necessary  struggle 
for  existence,  which  is  an  unwise  use  of  the  time,  energy 
and  ability  of  the  president,  trustees  and  friends  of  an  in- 
stitution, and  puts  a  premium  on  political  leadership  rather 
than  educational  leadership.  The  general  progress  in  this 
country  is  toward  academic  freedom  and  the  elimination 
of  politics  from  education. 

Dr.  Webster  Merrifield,  for  twenty-five  years  president 
of  the  University  of  North  Dakota,  writes  as  follows:  "I 
was  chiefly  responsible  for  the  passage  of  the  mill  tax  in 
North  Dakota  for  the  support  of  the  university  and  other 
state  schools,  and  was  at  the  head  of  the  University  of  North 
Dakota  during  ten  years  of  operation  under  the  tax.  My 
opinion  as  to  the  superiority  of  the  mill  tax  is  (1 )  Certainty ; 
(2)  Avoidance  of  unseemly  scrambles  between  the  several 
state  schools  before  the  appropriation  committees  of  the 
Legislature ;  (3)  Increase  of  income  from  year  to  year  fairly 
proportional  to  the  growth  of  the  state  in  wealth  and  the 
growth  of  the  university  in  numbers  and  needs.  Before 
the  passage  of  the  mill  tax  we  never  knew  before-hand 
whether  or  not  the  university  was  going  to  receive  a  fairly 
adequate  appropriation  for  maintenance.  There  was  a  re- 
currence each  biennial  period  of  unpleasant  rivalry  between 
the  different  state  schools.  There  was  need  of  almost  con- 
stant and  always  undignified  lobbying  throughout  the  ses- 
sion of  the  Legislature.  I  am. confident,  too,  that  the  uni- 
versity has  habitually  received  a  larger  annual  income  from 
the  tax  for  maintenance  than  it  could  have  hoped  to  receive 
during  the  same  time  from  direct  biennial  appropriations. 
Few  members  of  the  Legislature  of  1899  which  passed  the 
mill  tax  realized  or  ventured  to  say  how  large  an  income 
it  would  bring  to  the  several  state  schools.  Almost  every 
year  the  Legislature  is  raided  by  special  institutions  for 
appropriations.  They  maintain  skilled  lobbies,  and  but  for 
the  presence  on  the  statute  books  of  the  permanent  mill  tax, 
would  often  divert  to  themselves  a  portion  of  the  state's 


A  Mill  Tax  for  Higher  Educational  Institutions        65 

total  income  which  now  goes  to  the  schools.  After  ten  years 
of  operation  under  the  fixed  appropriations  for  state  schools, 
neither  the  schools  nor  the  members  of  the  Legislature 
would  be  willing  to  go  back  to  the  old  system.  The  legisla- 
tors themselves  are  spared  almost  endless  'pulling  and  haul- 
ing' by  individuals  whom  some  of  them  are  fond  of  alluding 
to  as  'those  educational  sharks,'  and  are  measurably  relieved 
of  the  importunities  of  a  most  persistent,  if  not  the  most 
numerous  and  unscrupulous  class  of  lobbyists.  For  the 
school  men,  too,  the  gain  is  enormous.  I  was  conscious  of 
an  immediate  and  tremendous  gain  in  self-respect  after 
being  relieved  of  the  necessity  of  engaging  in  a,  biennial 
scramble  for  existence,  institutionally  speaking.  And  if 
now  the  fixed  tax  for  maintenance  could  be  supplemented 
by  another  for  building  purposes,  I  should  feel  that  the  life 
of  a  state  university  president  is  as  nearly  ideal  as  is  often 
realized  on  this  earth." 

President  Charles  Van  Hise,  of  the  University  of  Wiscon- 
sin, writes  in  reference  to  the  mill  tax :  "The  fundamental 
argument  which  we  used  in  its  advocacy  was  that  in  a 
rapidly  growing  state  a  fixed  appropriation  continually  be- 
comes inadequate  because  the  university  grows  in  propor- 
tion to  the  growth  of  the  state.  I  showed  that  this  theory 
was  in  accordance  with  the  facts,  that  the  growth  of  the 
university  has  been  more  rapid  than  the  increase  in  income, 
and  that  in  consequence,  it  was  becoming  increasingly  diffi- 
cult to  keep  our  work  up  to  a  high  school  standard.  These 
ideas  were  finally  accepted  by  the  Legislature  and  we  were 
granted  two-sevenths  of  a  mill  tax,  which,  when  it  went  into 
effect,  raised  our  income  approximately  $200,000  per  an- 
num. Since  that  time  the  increase  in  assessed  valuation 
of  the  property  of  the  state  has  increased  our  income  an- 
nually not  less  than  $33,000,  and  the  increase  in  1908  is 
$63,000." 

A  mill  tax  is  seemingly  so  slight  that  it  does  not  raise 
the  violent  opposition  to  be  found  in  an  attempt  to  pass 
direct  appropriations,  and  again  the  proceeds  of  the  mill 


66  University  of  Texas  Bulletin 

tax  continue  to  increase  as  the  property  of  the  state  in- 
creases. The  mill  tax  in  the  State  of  Minnesota  has  doubled 
in  the  last  ten  years — $135,000  in  1900,  $265,000  in  1910. 

Dr.  J.  K.  Patterson,  president  of  the  State  College  of 
Kentucky,  whose  institution  has  been  supported  by  a  mill 
tax  of  one-twentieth  of  a  mill  for  the  past  twenty-seven 
years,  writes  that  he  prefers  this  method  of  support  because 
it  is  less  subject  to  the  caprice  of  the  Legislature.  He  states 
that  the  mill  tax  is  not  likely  to  be  repealed  in  Kentucky. 

Dr.  Charles  A.  Lowry,  president  of  the  State  Agricultural- 
College,  Fort  Collins,  Colorado,  writes  that  the  mill  tax  for 
his  institution  and  that  of  the  other  state  institutions  is  for 
support  and  buildings,  if  the  money  is  not  all  needed  for 
support.  The  advantage  of  the  mill  tax  lies  in  the  fact  that 
the  authorities  always  have  a  definite  basis  to  figure  on. 
The  Legislature  is  more  or  less  a  changeable  body,  and 
unless  a  definite  amount  is  provided,  the  authorities  and  the 
state  institutions  never  know  what  to  count  on.  Very  often 
hardly  enough  is  appropriated  for  maintenance.  Again,  a 
great  deal  is  appropriated  so  that  work  can  be  started  which 
must  later  be  given  up,  when  an  economical  Legislature 
comes  into  power. 

Mr.  E.  W.  Stanton,  secretary  of  Iowa  State  College,  writes 
that  his  institution  received  the  proceeds  of  a  tax  of  one- 
fifth  of  a  mill  for  building  purposes  which  yielded  in  1909- 
1910,  $135,000.  The  tax  runs  for  five  years,  but  has  been 
renewed  twice,  and  he  hopes  to  have  it  extended  for  another 
live-year  period  in  1912.  Since  the  first  tax  came  into  effect 
in  1900,  the  total  income  by  the  close  of  1912  will  be  some- 
thing more  than  $1,400,000.  The  buildings  on  the  college 
grounds  are  inventoried  at  something  over  $1,600,000  of 
this  value.  Prior  to  1900  the  department  buildings  were 
temporary  structures  utterly  inadequate  to  meet  the  grow- 
ing needs  of  the  institution.  The  millage  tax  lifted  the  col- 
lege out  of  these  temporary  buildings  into  fireproof,  durable 
structures  that  last  for  generations.  This  result  could  not 
have  been  accomplished  by  direct  appropriations  from  the 
general  revenues  of  the  state.  The  millage  tax  enables 


A  Mill  Tax  for  Higher  Educational  Institutions        67 

trustees  and  faculty  to  plan  wisely  in  the  matter  of  build- 
ings, and  has  helped  in  no  small  measure  to  the  symmetrical 
development  of  the  institutions,  the  fund  for  their  support 
must  be  taken  out  of  the  general  revenues,  and  this  is  al- 
ways insufficient.  Under  the  tax  method  the  income  grad- 
ually increases  with  the  increase  of  the  wealth  of  the  state. 

Excerpts  from  the  "Report  of  H.  S.  Pritchett,  Chairman  of  the  Car- 
negie Foundation  for  the  Advancement  of  Teaching.     1909." 

The  most  impressive  feature  of  the  advance  of  the  tax- 
supported  institutions  is  the  generous  support  accorded  to 
them  by  their  respective  states.  Several  states  now  con- 
tribute annually  a  million  dollars  each  to  the  support  of 
their  respective  state  universities,  and  in  some  states  the 
bulk  of  this  income  comes  in  the  form  of  a  mill  tax  which 
is  rendered  without  action  of  the  Legislature  and  which  in- 
creases automatically  with  each  revaluation  of  state  prop- 
erty. A  million  dollars  a  year  is,  however,  a  very  modest 
sum  for  a  great  and  rich  state  like  Wisconsin,  or  Illinois,  or 
California  to  spend  on  its  state  university.  These  institu- 
tions may  confidently  expect  incomes  far  larger  than  any 
privately  endowed  universities  can  hope  to  enjoy.  It  is 
clear  that  state  support  of  education  in  a  commonwealth 
educated  to  that  ideal  is  the  most  generous  and  constant 
source  from  which  such  support  can  be  drawn.  .  .  There 
is  one  feature  of  state  support  of  education  which  is  worth 
noting.  In  the  earlier  days  the  state  university  president 
was  expected  to  lobby  for  his  annual  appropriation.  In  the 
better  institutions  that  day  has  gone  by.  The  state  univer- 
sity president  goes  before  committees  of  the  Legislature 
with  his  budget.  He  appears  there  not  as  a  beggar  but  a& 
a  state  officer,  exactly  as  the  head  of  a  government  bureau 
goes  before  the  committees  of  appropriations  of  Congress. 

Excerpts  from  "A  Counsel  of  Perfection:  A  Plan  for  An  Automatic 
Collection  and  Distribution  of  a  State  Tax  for  Higher  Educa- 
tion." By  J.  G.  Rosengarten.    Reprinted  from  the  Proceedings 
of  the  American  Philosophical  Society,  Vol.  52,  No.  209, 
April,  1913. 


68  University  of  Texas  Bulletin 

Illinois,  Indiana,  Iowa,  Montana,  Wisconsin,  are  among 
the  western  states  which  have  state  universities.  In  their 
state  constitutions  provision  is  made  for  an  automatic  as- 
signment of  a  small  part  of  the  state  taxes  for  their  support. 
Thus  all  appeal  to  the  state  Legislature  for  support  is  made 
unnecessary.  In  Wisconsin,  and  in  many  other  universi- 
ties, colleges,  etc.,  the  United  States  Land  Grant  is  made 
part  of  the  endowment  of  the  state  university,  and  for  agri- 
cultural and  technical  schools.  Iowa  has  recently  put  all 
its  educational  institutions  under  a  single  governing  board. 
All  the  western  universities  have  out  of  the  increasing 
wealth  and  revenues  of  their  states  provided  incomes  grow- 
ing in  proportion  to  their  needs,  and  their  activities  keep 
pace  with  them. 

Dr.  James  B.  Angell,  President  of  the  University  of  Mich- 
igan, gives  the  following  reasons  for  preferring  a  mill  tax : 

"1.  When  several  items  are  named,  great  difficulty  for 
legislative  committees,  two  to  three  of  which  in  each  house 
have  to  act ;  difficult  to  make  some  members  appreciate  need 
of  some  items. 

"2.  A  university  should  know  approximately  some  few 
years  at  least  in  advance  what  it  can  depend  on,  in  order 
to  have  a  policy. 

"3.  As  one  Legislature  can  not  bind  its  successors,  it  has 
happened  to  us  to  have  one  provide  for  establishing  a  de- 
partment and  when  professors  and  apparatus  have  been 
secured  and  students  have  come,  the  next  Legislature  has 
failed  to  continue  it  and  much  embarrassment  has  followed, 
e.g.,  our  school'  of  mines. 

"Whereas,  our  experience  shows  that  once  the  mill  tax  is 
adopted,  the  disposition  of  legislatures  is  to  increase  it,  not 
to  abolish  it. 

"Begin  with  a  modest  rate,  and  trust  the  future  for 
growth." 


A  Mill  Tax  for  Higher  Educational  Institutions        69 
SUMMARY  OF  POINTS  IN  FAVOR  OF  A  MILL  TAX 

Adapted  from  a  bulletin  issued  by  the  University  of  Kansas  in  1912, 
entitled,  "A  Plea  for  a  Mill  Tax" 

1.  A  mill  tax  would  benefit  the  state's  higher  educational 
institutions.     It  would  ensure  a  more  healthy  growth  of 
such  institutions,  because  normal  growth  in  an  educational 
institution  is  possible  only  when  plans  providing  for  such 
growth  can  be  made,  extending  over  a  number  of  years, 

2.  It  would  make  it  less  easy  for  other  universities  to 
take  some  of  the  best  teachers  from  Texas,  as  they  have 
been  doing,  because  of  the  greater  permanence  of  these 
universities  in  the  matter  of  income,  and  the  greater  cer- 
tainty with  which  their  teachers  can  depend  on  the  contin- 
uance of  their  work. 

3.  It  would  make  it  possible  to  take  better  care  of  the 
details  of  the  schools'  administration.     Under  the  present 
system,  the  university  budget  for  the  expenditures  in  June, 
1917,  had  to  be  compiled  in  the  fall  of  1914 — almost  three 
years  ahead.     With  a  permanent  income,  each  year  would 
be  provided  for  as  occasion  required  and  the  administration 
would  know  definitely  what  to  count  on. 

4.  It  would  have  the  time  of  administrative  heads  and 
members  of  the  faculty  who  are  compelled  by  their  duty  to 
the  interests  entrusted  to  them  by  the  state  to  go  to  Austin 
and  exert  their  efforts  to  have  these  interests  understood 
by  the  Legislature,  in  order  to  prevent  the  doing  of  some 
serious  injury  to  some  branch  of  the  educational  or  state 
service  work  through  oversight  or  lack  of  knowledge. 

5.  It  would  relieve  administrative  heads  from  the  hu- 
miliation of  being  criticised  for  attending  committee  ses- 
sions at  the  Legislature  and  doing  the  necessary  legislative 
work  to  which  their  devotion  and  duty  to  their  institutions 
obligates  them. 

6.  It  would  put  Texas  among  the  states  which  have 
already  given  their  educational  institutions  the  advantage 
of  permanent  incomes  by  fixed  tax :  Iowa,  Ohio,  Wisconsin, 


70  University  of  Texas  Bulletin 

Michigan,  Minnesota,  Colorado,  California,  Indiana,  Illinois, 
Nebraska,  and  others. 

7.  It  would  remove  all  temptation  from  educational  in- 
stitutions to  save  their  interests  by  resorting  to  political 
methods.     No  state  institution  would  ever  be  drawn  into 
politics. 

8.  It  would  put  the  maintenance  of  the  higher  educa- 
tional institutions  on  a  permanent  basis,  removing  them 
from  the  danger  of  having  their  revenues  curtailed  by 
caprice  or  financial  depression,  and  enabling  the  administra  - 
tion  to  pursue  a  definite  business-like  policy. 

9.  It  would  insure  the  gradual  and  proportionate  in- 
crease of  the  revenues  for  education  as  the  value  of  the 
property  in  the  state  increases,  providing  automatically  the 
larger  means  of  meeting  growing  needs. 

10.  It  would  emphasize  the  insignificance  of  the  cost  of 
education  to  the  individual  taxpayer.     If  he  pays  taxes  on  a 
valuation  of  $10,000  the  mill  tax  would  cost  him  $10.  Would 
any  man  question  that  the  presence  in  the  state  of  educa- 
tional institutions,  doing  an  immense  amount  of  state  serv- 
ice work,  adds  not  one  but  many  dollars  to  the  value  of  each 
thousand  dollars  worth  of  property  that  he  possesses  ? 

11.  A  permanent  tax  would  relieve  the  legislator  from 
the  responsibility  of  the  present  large  total  of  appropria- 
tions, removing  from  his  shoulders  the  burden  of  practically 
the  entire  educational  budget  of  the  state.     It  would  also 
relieve  him  from  the  well-meant  but  sometimes  over-zealous 
importunities  of  the  advocates  of  the,  various  institutions. 
It  would  save  the  time  of  legislators  who  are  now  compelled 
to  study  the  intricacies  of  appropriation  bills  while  occupied 
with  scores  of  other  legislative  matters.     To  understand 
thoroughly  the  details  of  the  university  appropriation  bill 
alone  would  require  all  the  time  that  the  ordinary  legislator 
can  devote  to  the  duties  of  the  legislative  session. 

12.  It  would  build  up  more  creditable  institutions.     By 
eliminating  competition  it  would  make  towards  a  better  co- 
operation among  the  various  schools,  and  a  consequent  in- 
crease of  efficiency  and  value  to  the  state. 


A  Mill  Tax  for  Higher  Educational  Institutions        71 

13.  It  would  result  in  a  more  economic  administration  of 
the  educational  institutions  because  systems  based  on  a 
stable  and  calculable  income  always  mean  economy. 

14.  It  would  be  to  the  advantage  of  the  taxpayers  be- 
cause it  would  insure  their  getting  the  greatest  possible  effi- 
ciency out  of  the  state  schools,  the  greatest  possible  value 
for  their  money,  since  only  with  a  fixed  and  permanent  in- 
come can  an  educational  institution  do  its  best  work. 

THE  TAX  LEVY  AND  BUDGET  SYSTEM 

Extract  from  1920  Biennial  Report  of  the  Board  of  Regents  of  the 
University   of   Texas 

i 

We  heartily  approve  the  tax-rate  levy,  instead  of  specific 
appropriations,  as  a  means  for  obtaining  the  necessary 
funds  to  finance  the  university,  and  the  budget  system  as  a 
method  of  applying  these  funds  to  the  needs  of  the  separate 
departments.  The  former  enables  us  to  know  with  reason- 
able certainty  the  financial  resources  for  each  biennial  term, 
and  the  latter  secures  the  application  of  the  fund  for  the 
specific  purposes  needed  and  still  leaves  sufficient  flexibility 
to  meet  the  ordinary  unforeseen  contingencies.  Since  the 
budget  was  fixed,  it  was  found  imperative  that  compensa- 
tion of  the  faculty  be  increased  if  the  university  was  to  re- 
tain the  services  of  those  competent  to  maintain  the  stand- 
ard of  efficiency  in  instruction  which  the  institution  deserves 
and  the  state  desires.  During  the  same  period  the  ordinary 
expenses  of  administration  have  not  escaped  the  increased 
burdens  incident  to  every  operating  enterprise!  Yet,  not- 
withstanding these  demands,  which  could  not  be  fully  antic- 
ipated, it  is  with  pride  and  pleasure  that  we  report  to  you 
that  the  university  is  within  its  budget  and  asks  no  de- 
ficiency appropriation.  By  reference  to  the  budget  and  the 
Comptroller's  system  of  accounting,  which  has  received  the 
most  favorable  commendation  of  both  state  and  federal 
officials,  we  have  at  all  times  been  able  to  ascertain  the  con- 
dition of  the  university  fund  as  a  whole  and  of  each  separate 
department.  In  our  judgment,  to  depart  from  the  tax-rate. 


72  University  of  Texas  Bulletin 

levy  as  a  fund-producing  system  and  the  budget  as  a  method 
of  applying  and  expending  it,  would  be  unwise  and  injurious 
to  every  interest  of  both  the  state  and  university. 

THE    LEGISLATURE   AND   LEGISLATION 

Extract  from  the  final  message  of  Dr.  S.  E.  Mezes  to  the  Board  of 
Regents   of   the    University   of   Texas   in    1914 

I  have  spoken  of  the  Legislature  as  one  of  the  governing 
boards  of  the  university,  and  so  it  is.  It  governs  the  uni- 
versity by  determining  biennially  what  funds  shall  be  avail- 
able for  the  carrying  on  of  its  activities ;  and,  in  performing 
this  function,  it  from  time  to  time  at  least  prevents  things 
from  being  done  which  its  colleagues,  the  regents,  believe  to 
be  desirable,  or  even  all  but  necessary.  Moreover,  in  meas- 
ures besides  the  money  bills,  the  Legislature  exercises  con- 
trol over  the  university.  If  this  function  is  exercised  in  a  re- 
sponsible spirit,  the  Legislature  can  greatly  help  the  insti- 
tution both  negatively  and  positively. 

The  corollary  is  that  the  Legislature  can  greatly  injure 
and  hamper  the  university.  It  seems  plain  that  a  body  of 
men,  many  of  whom  are  serving  their  first  term,  and  none 
of  whom  have  any  continuous  or  intimate  knowledge  of  the 
workings  of  the  institution,  can  not,  with  profit  to  the  state, 
attempt  to  direct  its  aif  airs  in  any  detail. 

At  the  same  time,  the  Legislature  can  not  escape  the  duty 
of  giving  some  directions  to  the  university ;  and  it  is  to  be 
hoped  that  it  will,  in  time,  devise  some  method  of  perform- 
ing this  duty  that  will  enable  it  to  deal  with  so  important  a 
matter  in  a  manner  less  casual  than  it  has  heretofore  adopt- 
ed. I  believe  it  would  be  a  good  plan  for  the  Legislature 
to  employ,  every  few  years,  a  small  expert  commission, 
made  up  of  two  leading  educators,  from  without  the  state, 
of  national  prominence  and  competence,  and  of  one  first- 
class  business  expert,  this  commission  being  charged  with 
a  thorough  detailed  study  of  the  institution  and  the  formula- 
tion of  a  report,  with  criticisms  and  constructive  sugges- 
tions. 


A  Mill  Tax  for  Higher  Educational  Institutions        73 

If  the  university  is  to  serve  Texas  as  it  should,  its  income 
must  be  greatly  increased — in  fact,  more  than  doubled.  A 
modern  state  university  can  not  operate  efficiently  on  less 
than  two  millions  a  year;  and,  in  a  huge  state  like  Texas, 
it  should,  in  the  near  future,  be  provided  with  three  mil- 
lions annually.  Three  universities  in  states  much  smaller 
are  expending  nearly  the  latter  sum  today,  to  the  great 
benefit  of  their  constituencies. 

In  addition,  the  following  measures  of  legislation  would, 
I  believe,  be  very  helpful  to  the  university  in  the  perform- 
ance of  its  duties  of  service,  and  correspondingly  helpful  to 
the  state  as  a  whole :  ( 1 )  a  statutory  measure  levying  a 
special  tax  for  the  support  of  the  institution ;  (2  *  an  amend- 
ment repealing  the  portion  of  Section  14  of  Article  VII, 
of  the  constitution  prohibiting  appropriations  of  tax  levies 
for  the  erection  of  university  buildings ;  and  (3)  a  statutory 
measure,  if  the  constitution  permits  that  method,  authoriz- 
ing the  issuance  of  bonds,  with  interest  and  sinking  fund 
payable  out  of  the  available  university  fund,  for  the  con- 
struction oi  buildings  and  the  purchase  of  additional  ground 
to  enlarge  the  campus. 

The  special  tax  has  been  so  often  and  fully  discussed  that 
little  need  be  said  here.  It  costs  no  more  to  support  the 
university  ou:  of  the  proceeds  of  a  special  tax  than  out  of 
biennial  appropriations.  The  chief  advantages  of  the  tax 
are  two:  (1)  the  regents  will  know  what  they  can  depend 
upon  in  the  matter  of  support,  and  can  lay  their  plans  ac- 
cordingly in  a  far-sighted  and  business-like  way;  (2)  the 
university  will  be  withdrawn  further  from  the  disturbing 
and  perilous  contact  with  politics  into  which  the  method  of 
biennial  appropriations  unavoidably  draws  it. 

The  university  is  the  only  institution  in  Texas  and  the 
only  university  in  existence  which  is  prevented  by  state 
constitution  from  constructing  buildings  out  of  moneys  ap- 
propriated from  the  general  revenue  or  proceedings  from 
tax  levies.  The  prohibition  was  the  chance  enactment  of  a 
busy  convention;  has  not  the  shadow  of  reason  for  its  ex- 
istence ;  does  no  particle  of  good ;  and  should  unquestionably 
be  repealed  at  the  earliest  moment  possible. 


74  University  of  Texas  Bulletin 

The  briefest  study  of  the  question  makes  it  plain  that 
those  who  object  to  authorizing  the  issuance  of  bonds  under 
reasonable  restrictions  for  the  construction  of  buildings  do 
so  because  they  have'  given  the  question  no  study.  The  ad- 
vantages of  the  plan  are  palpable,  and  there  are  no  serious 
objections  to  it  if  the  measure  is  properly  drawn.  It  is  a 
plan  that  has  been  adopted  by  every  large  private  enterprise 
that  is  intelligently  managed ;  the  plan  that  has  been  adopt- 
ed in  constructing  practically  all  the  existing  school  build- 
ings in  Texas  and  in  other  states,  as  well  as  by  most  counties 
and  cities  here  and  elsewhere.  Its  convenience  arises  from 
the  fact  that  buildings  are  costly,  and  that  it  lias  been  at 
no  time  possible  in  Texas  to  provide  large  enough  buildings, 
good  enough  buildings  and  a  sufficient  number  of  buildings 
to  meet  the  needs,  if  their  total  cost  is  to  be  borne  by  the 
taxpayers  of  a  single  year.  Its  equity  arises  from  the  fun- 
damental maximum  of  taxation,  that  those  who  enjoy  the 
benefits  derived  from  the  proceeds  of  tax  levies  should  pay 
the  taxes,  and  that  it  is  unfair  for  only  a  portion  of  those 
enjoying  such  benefits  to  meet  the  entire  tax.  Properly 
constructed  buildings  should  last  from  thirty  to  a  hundred 
years;  their  cost  should  be  borne  by  the  people  enjoying  and 
receiving  the  benefit  from  them  at  least  during  the  thirty- 
year  period. 

MILL  TAX  SYSTEM  OF  UNIVERSITY  SUPPORT 

Extract  from  an  address  delivered  by  Edward  G.  Smith,  President  of 
the  West  Virginia  University  Ex-Students'  Association  in  1914 

The  paramount  need  of  the  university  is  adequate  finan- 
cial support,  as  by  a  separate,  continuing  mill  tax,  legisla- 
tive and  constitutional. 

It  requires  no  great  penetration  to  discover  how  univer- 
sity support  could  be  liberalized,  better  secured  and  better 
utilized  in  a  system  of  separate,  continuing  mill  tax,  than 
in  the  caprice  of  biennial  legislative  appropriations,  often 
made  grudgingly,  sometimes  reduced  to  sums  tbat  are  nig- 
gardly, sometimes  transferred  to  other  uses,  always  subject 


A  Mill  Tax  for  Higher  Educational  Institutions        75 

to  political  necessities  and  political  uncertainties,  never 
made  according  to  any  definite  and  continued  system  of  far- 
sighted  vision  and  therefore  always  wastful  and  inefficient, 
Bryce  in  his  American  Commonwealth,  brieflv  describing 
the  appropriation  system  and  the  mill  tax  system  and  pre- 
ferring the  latter,  says  : 

"Many  of  the  state  universities  of  the  West  re- 
ceive a  grant  from  the  state  treasury,  voted  an- 
nually or  biennially  by  the  Legislature,  but  a 
preferable  plan,  which  several  states  have  recently 
adopted,  is  to  enact  a  permanent  statute  giving  an- 
nually to  the  university  some  fraction  of  a  mill  (1- 
1000  of  a  dollar)  out  of  every  dollar  of  the  total 
valuation  of  the  state.  This  acts  automatically, 
increasing  the  grant  as  the  resources  of  the  state 
increase." 

Under  the  existing  biennial  appropriation  system  our  uni- 
versity has  never  been  able  to  be  liberated  from  political 
embarrassments. 

Governor  Jackson,  believing  after  his  namesake,  "Old 
Hickory,"  that  "to  the  victor  belong  the  spoils,"  treated  the 
university  as  among  his  political  spoils.  In  this  respect  he 
differed  neither  from  most  of  his  predecessors  nor  from 
most  of  his  successors. 

Dr.  I.  C.  White,  of  the  chair  of  geology,  and  Professor 
T.  M.  Jackson,  of  the  school  of  engineering,  assumming 
there  was  no  reason  why  the  Pennsylvania  oil  field  should 
stop  with  Mason  and  Dixon's  line  at  Mt.  Morris,  took  their 
classes  on  the  ground  and  ran  levels  and  traced  the  oil  field 
far  into  West  Virginia  and  located  the  great  Mannington 
pool.  This  is  a  kind  of  work  students  need.  To  this  day 
the  faces  of  those  boys  beam  with  joy  at  the  remembrance 
of  that  experience.  In  a  professional  way  on  chat  survey 
from  Mt.  Morris  to  Mannington  they  saw  a  new  light.  That 
light  is  with  them  yet. 

And  what  an  inestimable  service  to  the  state ! 
In  a  few  years  after  this,  neither  of  these  distinguished 
men  was  longer  connected  with  the  university. 

Dean  Hogg  but  recently  tried  to  connect  his  school  of  law 
with  practical  work  on  West  Virginia  textbooks  and  code 


76  University  of  Texas  Bulletin 

and  living  cases  including  the  already  celebrated  Virginia 
debt  case. 

Hogg's  practice  books  and  Hogg's  code  are  on  the  desk 
of  every  West  Virginia  practitioner.  Hogg  is  stili  connected 
with  the  debt  case  but  is  now  entirely  disconnected  from 
the  university. 

It  is  a  well  known  fact  in  legislative  circles,  that  two  years 
ago  (as,  since  before  the  days  of  Governor  Jackson,  had 
been,  for  political  reasons,  the  rule),  the  appropriation  bill 
was  first  placed  before  the  Legislature  on  the  last  day  of  the 
session,  in  the  afternoon  of  that  day.  In  the  remaining 
fragment  of  the  closing  day  of  the  session,  what  opportunity 
had  the  friends  of  the  university  on  the  floor  of  either  house 
to  take  care  of  her  needs  ? 

It  is  an  equally  well  known  fact  that  the  last  Legislature 
appropriated  for  buildings  and  lands,  for  normal  schools 
and  university,  $300,000,  and  that  by  reason  of  other  de- 
mands on  the  state  treasury,  deemed  by  a  part  of  the  execu- 
tive branch  of  the  state  government  more  urgent  than  edu- 
cation, the  appropriations  were  not,  for  about  i  year  and  a 
half  after  the  close  of  the  session,  by  the  executive  depart- 
ment, "released"  for  educational  use. 

A  few  years  ago  after  President  Raymond  had  quickly 
but  undiplomatically  done  so  much  more  for  the  advance- 
ment of  the  university  than  many  of  his  predecessors,  com- 
bined, there  arose,  in  certain  quarters  outside  his  faculty 
and  board  of  regents,  an  envious  wave  of  unpopularity,  and 
the  appropriations  for  the  university  were  made  available 
only  upon  his  removal. 

Four  years  ago  a  professor  of  the  university,  employed  to 
teach  Greek,  never  supposing  he  had  sold  his  political  integ- 
rity for  a  professor's  salary,  criticized  a  certain  political 
policy  and  thereupon  his  dismissal  was  demanded  and  the 
then  pending  appropriation  bill  for  the  university  was  not 
passed  until  his  dismissal  was  accomplished — a  circum- 
stance which,  by  way  of  a  contrast  to  make  every  West 
Virginian  blush,  calls  to  mind  the  long  continued  and  mag- 
nanimous indulgence  of  the  absolute  despotism  of  Russia 


A  Mill  Tax  for  Higher  Educational  Institutions        77 

towards  the  greatest  opposition  teacher  among  its  subjects, 
Count  Tolstoi,  and  calls  to  mind  the  recent  incident  of 
Harvard  sustaining  the  political  integrity  of  a  professor  at 
the  definite  cost  of  a  $10,000,000  legacy.  . 

In  these  practices  it  is  not  to  be  supposed  that  one  polit- 
ical party  differs  widely  from  another,  nor  is  it  to  be  sup- 
posed these  practices  are  confined  to  a  single  state,  nor  to  a 
few  states  of  the  Union.  But,  however  regrettable  that 
may  be,  it  is  gratifying  to  know  that  under  a  system  such 
as  the  mill  tax  system  suggested,  financial  support  for  the 
university  would  be  as  secure  as  it  ought  to  be  and  profes- 
sional seats  in  the  university  would  be  as  secure  as  they 
ought  to  be  and  the  university  would  be  set  free  from  pol- 
itics. 

Under  the  existing  system  of  biennial  appropriations  the 
university  has  no  fixed  or  certain  base  for  definite  plans 
projected  far  into  the  future. 

Not  only  must  there  be  freedom  from  political  interfer- 
ence but  there  must  be  foresight.  There  must  be  certainty. 
There  must  be  plan.  There  must  be  perspective.  The  uni- 
versity authorities  must  know  in  advance,  not  two  years,  but 
many  years  what  they  will  have  to  spend  in  order  to  know 
how  to  spend  it  to  the  best  advantage,  in  systematically 
building  up  a  greater  institution.  In  no  other  way  can  they 
so  plan  and  work  by  plan  as  to  eliminate  waste,  to  secure 
efficiency,  to  attain  harmonious  development,  ard  to  obtain, 
generally  maximum  results. 

The  point  may  be  illustrated  in  university  architecture 
by  the  noble  harmony  on  the  campus  at  Charlottesville,  the 
result  of  Jefferson's  plan,  contrasted  with  the  want  of  it 
elsewhere. 

How  can  the  management  evolve  their  schools  or  equip 
the  university  in  accord  with  any  high  degree  of  excellence 
upon  biennial  contingencies?  Uncertainty  must  be  elim- 
inated and  the  university  placed  upon  some  financial  foot- 
ing at  least  as  certain,  permanent  and  automatic  as  is  the 
rest  of  our  free  school  system. 

When  the  taxable  values  in  the  state  are  fixed  and  the 


78  University  of  Texas  Bulletin 

number  of  mills  per  dollar  or  per  hundred  dollars  to  be  set 
apart  to  the  university  equipment  and  maintenance  are  de- 
termined, no  element  of  uncertainty  remains  except  what 
may  be  due  to  changing  values  from  one  valuation  period 
to  another  which  presumably  would  increase  with  the  in- 
creased needs  of  the  university.  These  give  a  definite  base 
upon  which  to  plan  a  university  and  all  its  departments  and 
for  apportionment  among  the  respective  departments.  They 
form  a  base  for  plans  designed  to  cover  a  long  period  of 
years  such  as  may  not  be  evolved  in  two-year  periods  or 
ten-year  periods  or  a  generation.  These  long  time  plans, 
based  upon  fixed  assets  available,  and  certainly  to  become 
available,  make  for  proportion  and  harmony  in  development, 
make  for  economy  in  expenditure  and  make  for  efficiency. 
In  fine,  they  make  for  maximum  results  and  have  nothing 
but  contrast  with  the  present  hand-to-mouth  system,  or 
want  of  system,  wasteful  and  inefficient. 

Another  consideration  of  the  system  proposed  is  its  at- 
tractiveness to  the  best  teaching  talent  in  the  country.  It 
would  not  only  retain  our  best  talent  at  home  but  would 
invite  the  best  talent  and  genius  from  abroad.  Men  of 
talent  and  genius  are  willing  to  work  for  much  smaller 
financial  remuneration  if  they  can  only  be  assured  of  an  op- 
portunity to  do  their  best  work,  often  requiring  many  years, 
often  requiring  a  life-time,  for  its  accomplishment  and  only 
possible  in  universities  which  can  make  permanent  plans 
covering  a  long  period  of  years  and  with  reasonable  cer- 
tainty of  their  due  execution,  in  an  atmosphere  of  freedom. 

The  mill  tax  system  of  whole  or  partial  university  support 
has  been  adopted  for  many  leading  institutions  in  more  than 
a  dozen  states  in  this  country,  including  the  universities  of 
Wisconsin,  of  Michigan  and  of  Illinois,  and  the  annual  and 
biennial  appropriation  system  is  already  antiquated. 

Show  me  a  state  university  now  dependent  entirely  upon 
annual  and  biennial  appropriations  and  I  will  show  you  a 
cripple. 

At  the  last  June  meeting  of  the  Alumni  Association  it 
unanimously  adopted  a  resolution  introduced  by  President 


A  Mill  Tax  for  Higher  Educational  Institutions        79 

Gore  of  the  Harrison  Club,  favoring  an  arrangement  for 
permanently  financing  the  university  by  means  of  a  contin- 
uing mill  tax.  Under  date  of  July  31,  I  had  a  letter  from 
Mr.  Shawkey,  state  superintendent  of  free  schools  and  pres- 
ident of  the  board  of  regents,  committing  himself  unre- 
servedly to  that  resolution.  At  a  recent  meeting  of  the 
board  of  regents  at  Wheeling  it  committed  itself  to  the 
substance  of  that  resolution  and  it  now  seems  a  very  op- 
portune moment  to  present  the  proposition  to  the  business 
men  of  the  state  through  this  state  board  of  trade  and  I 
most  earnestly  hope  for  your  very  careful  and  your  very 
favorable  consideration  of  it. 

For  we  are  convinced  the  answer  to  the  second  inquiry  is : 
The  required  means  for  university  support  may  be  made 
certainly  available  by  means  of  a  continuing  mill  tax,  legis- 
lative and  constitutional,  and  this  may  be  brought  about  by 
the  policy  suggested  respecting  our  distinguished  men,  our 
alumni  organization  and  a  loyal  efficient,  university  service 
extended  to  the  general  public. 

ADVANTAGES  OF  THE  MILLAGE— STATE 
INSTITUTIONS  HAVING  IT 

t^O^/ 
Extract   from   the  Report  of  George   E.   McLean,   President   of  the     /°.  11 

State  University  of  Iowa,  for  1911-1913 

^ 

Experience  proves  that  the  millage  method  is  the  best 
one.  Twelve  of  the  most  progressive  states,  supporting 
twenty-one  of  the  most  prosperous  institutions,  have  the 
millage  system  as  one  of  the  means  for  support  or  build- 
ings, or  both. 

There  can  be  no  better  illustration  of  the  advantages  of 
the  millage  system  over  the  hit-or-miss  special  appropriation 
method  for  buildings  than  in  the  history  of  the  University 
of  Iowa.  Excluding  the  Old  Capitol,  the  first  building  at 
the  university,  originally  a  gift  from  the  United  States, 
from  the  beginning  of  the  university  up  to  the  first  install- 
ment of  the  millage  tax  in  1896  there  were  erected  ten  build- 


80  University  of  Texas  Bulletin 

ings,  of  cheap  construction,  without  architectural  merit,  at 
an  original  expenditure  of  $234,375.  These  buildings  were 
not  fireproof,  and  three  of  them  were  destroyed  by  fire,  with 
great  accompanying  loss  of  their  equipment,  apparatus,  and 
valuable  specimens,  to  say  nothing  of  the  interruption  of 
the  work  of  the  university.  Under  the  millage,  including 
the  buildings  erected  and  contracted  for,  with  the  two  build- 
ings for  which  a  special  appropriation  was  granted,  there 
will  have  been  erected  18  buildings  since  the  beginning  of 
the  millage  in  1896,  or  twice  as  many  buildings  as  were  put 
up  from  the  beginning  of  the  university  during  nearly  a 
half  century.  The  total  cost  of  these  buildings  was  $1.093,- 
050,  as  compared  with  the  total  original  cost  of  the  earlier 
nine  buildings  of  $234,875.  The  buildings  under  the  mill- 
age,  with  two  exceptions,  have  been  fireproof,  of  stone, 
built  to  last  for  all  time,  harmonious  in  architecture,  chaste 
in  their  simplicity,  and  unsurpassed  in  their  adaptation  to 
their  uses.  They  have  been  erected  with  the  future  in 
view,  combining  artistic  and  economic  effects.  Olmsted 
Brothers  of  Boston,  have  been  consulting  landscape  archi- 
tects. They  and  other  experts  and  educators,  who  have 
visited  the  university  declare  that  it  has  unique  advantages 
for  its  buildings  and  campus.  These  advantages  come  from 
the  university  entering  upon  its  building  era  later  than  sis- 
ter universities,  enabled  by  the  millage  to  adopt  consistent 
and  economic  building  policies,  and  having  unusual  phys- 
ical advantages  in  the  location  of  the  university  on  the  slope 
in  connection  with  the  Iowa  River. 

The  greatest  benefit  from  the  millage  to  the  university, 
much  as  the  public  is  impressed  by  the  buildings,  is  the  de- 
velopment of  the  real  work  of  the  university.  Some  times 
the  building  era  of  a  university  -is  at  the  expense  of  its 
school  work.  Just  the  contrary  has  been  the  result  at  this 
university.  The  tide  of  migration  of  Iowa  students  outside 
the  state  has  in  part  been  turned  by  the  sight  of  the  build- 
ings and  by  knowledge  of  the  state's  consistent  policy  under- 
lie millage,  of  equipping  the  institutions.  The  positively 
unsanitary  conditions  for  the  professors  and  students  in 


A  Mill  Tax  for  Higher  Educational  Institutions        81 

the  form  of  overcrowded  and  unventilated  buildings  have 
been  removed. 

The  underpaid  staff  of  instruction  in  part  has  been  held 
because  of  the  facilities  and  equipment  given  them  in  these 
buildings.  The  quality  of  the  instruction,  so  dependent  in 
these  days,  even  in  the  literatures  as  well  as  the  sciences, 
upon  the  laboratory  methods  has  been  improved.  Many 
lines  of  research  (the  very  essence  of  a  university)  requir- 
ing proper  housing  have  been  strengthened  and  the  graduate 
college  made  possible.  The  new  buildings  have  made  it 
possible  for  the  university  to  serve  the  public  welfare;  for 
example,  the  state  bacteriological  laboratory  in  service  of 
the  public  health,  the  psychological  laboratory  in  service  of 
the  schools,  etc.  In  short,  one  of  the  original  chief  factors 
contributing  to  the  recognition  of  the  university  has  been 
due  to  the  millage  tax. 

MILLAGE  TAX 

Extract  from  the  Report  of  the  Iowa  State  Board 
of  Education  for  1911 

Some  months  ago  the  board  ordered  a  careful  investiga- 
tion for  the  purpose  of  deciding  whether  or  not  the  Legisla- 
ture should  be  asked  to  continue  what  is  known  as  the  mill- 
age  tax,  the  proceeds  of  which  have  been  used  for  the  erec- 
tion of  buildings  at  the  several  institutions.  As  a  result 
of  this  investigation,  the  board  has  unanimously  decided  to 
ask  for  the  continuance  of  this  tax  for  an  additional  five- 
year  period. 

We  find  that  this  method  of  providing  for  buildings  is 
the  one  in  vogue  in  California  for  the  state  university  of 
that  state,  in  Colorado  for  the  state  agricultural  college  and 
school  of  mines,  in  Indiana  for  the  state  university,  in  Ken- 
tucky for  the  University  of  Kentucky,  in  Michigan  for  both 
of  its  institutions  of  higher  learning,  also  in  Minnesota, 
Nebraska,  North  Dakota,  Ohio,  Wisconsin  and  Wyoming. 
It  is  a  fact  easily  demonstrated  that  the  institutions  as  they 
now  exist  have  practically  been  created  out  of  the  proceeds 
of  this  levy. 


82  University  of  Texas  Bulletin 

Buildings  Erected  at  the  State  Teachers'  College 

At  the  state  teachers'  college  the  tax  has  performed  a  like 
service.  President  Seerley  has  tersly  summed  up  the  situa- 
tion in  general,  as  follows :  "The  creation  of  the  first  millage 
in  1902  opened  the  way  for  a  satisfactory  system  of  con- 
struction, enabled  plans  to  be  carefully  made,  and  began  a 
possibility  for  creditable  educational  institutions  in  the  state 
of  Iowa.  Up  to  that  time  the  cheapest  form  of  construc- 
tion had  been  used,  the  poorest  kind  of  architecture  was  ac- 
cepted, and  the  equipment  was  beggarly  and  insufficient  to 
permit  the  work  that  such  institutions  were  supposed  to 
undertake  and  to  pretend  to  accomplish.  Without  this  im- 
provement in  the  construction  of  buildings  for  higher  edu- 
cation, the  Iowa  institutions  would  have  been  among  the 
weakest  and  most  unattractive  in  the  whole  United  States. 
With  the  present  policy  continued  the  time  is  not  very  dis- 
tant when  Iowa  will  be  on  a  par  with  any  of  the  states." 

ARGUMENTS  FOR  AND  AGAINST  A  PROPOSED  MILL 

TAX  AMENDMENT  TO  THE  CONSTITUTION  OF 

CALIFORNIA  WHICH  WAS  SUBMITTED  TO 

THE  ELECTORS  OF  THAT  STATE  ON 

TUESDAY,  NOVEMBER  2,  1920 

The  state  is  suffering  from  a  crisis  at  the  university  for 
financial  reasons.  Its  revenue  must  be  placed  upon  a  more 
sound  and  permanent  basis.  It  is  specifically  urged : 

(1)  The  tax  here  sought  is  not  new  in  principle.     A 
similar  legislative  measure  in  force  from  1893  to  1910  en- 
abled the  university  to  be  of  the  greatest  service  in  its  his- 
tory, and  was  emphatically  favored  by  legislatures  and  the 
public  alike.     This  tax  was  impliedly  repealed  in  1910  by 
Constitutional  Amendment  No.  1. 

(2)  The  university  is  now  financed  upon  the  basis  of 
1910.     Yet  from  1910  to  1920  the  students  at  Berkeley 
alone  increased  in  numbers  from  3300  to  9800 — an  increase 
of  200  per  cent — the  recently  inaugurated  branch  at  Los 


A  Mill  Tax  for  Higher  Educational  Institutions        83 

Angeles  has  an  additional  1300,  the  professional  colleges 
and  farm  schools  throughout  the  state  are  growing  rapidly, 
and  the  1919  registration  for  extension  work  alone  was 
16,000. 

(3)  Classroom  and  housing  facilities  utterly  fail  to  take 
care  of  the  increased  numbers.     Classroom  facilities  have 
increased  only  20  per  cent.     New  buildings  are  essential  for 
the  general  sciences  and  the  new  school  of  education.     Stu- 
dents can  not  get  housing  accommodations,  and  dormito- 
ries must  be  built.     At  the  opening  of  each  college  year 
these  problems  become  acute. 

(4)  Classes  are  much  too  large.     A  student  can  not  re- 
ceive the  necessary  individual  attention  from  his  instructor 
in  a  class  of  hundreds. 

(5)  Compensation   of  the   teaching  force   must  be   in- 
creased.    There  has  been  an  increase  of  but  25  per  cent  in 
salaries  in  the  past  ten  years.     In  consequence,  the  problem 
of  getting  competent  instructors  grows  increasingly  diffi- 
cult.    The  best  experts  are  either  sought  by  other  institu- 
tions which  offer  higher  compensation,  or  go  into  private 
business.     These  men  must  have  spent  at  least  seven  years 
of  non-remunerative  time  in  order  to  qualify  for  their  posi- 
tions, and  for  some  time  past  only  loyalty  to  the  university 
has  kept  many  of  the  best  men  there.     The  threatened  loss 
of  our  best  experts  in  farming,  irrigation,  mining,  engi- 
neering and  the  other  arts  and  sciences  must  be  avoided 
at  all  hazards. 

(6)  Under  the  present  system,  the  university  must  ask 
for  aid  each  legislative  session.     Our  legislatures  have  been 
generous,  but  even  this  experience  in  the  past  can  not  take 
away  the  constant  uncertainty  for  the  future.     No  compre- 
hensive plan  for  growth  and  expansion  can  now  be  made. 
The  proposed  plan  will  remove  this  uncertainty  and  avoid 
the  necessity  of  a  scramble  for  funds. 

(7)  Other  states,  sixteen  in  number,  have  recognized  this 
principle  of  the  automatic  tax  as  being  the  best  method  of 
supporting  a  state  university. 

(8)  By  this  measure  every  taxpayer  who  has  property 


84  University  of  Texas  Bulletin 

subject  to  assessment  of  the  assessed  value  of  $1,000  will 
pay  $1.20  per  year  for  the  support  of  the  university  and  all 
its  branches.  The  university  may  remain  a  free  institution, 
without  tuition  fees,  and  its  services  to  our  agricultural, 
mining  and  other  interests  can  grow  from  year  to  year  to 
meet  the  growing  needs  of  the  state. 

WARREN  GREGORY, 
President  Alumni  Association  of  the 
University  of  California, 

Argument  Against  State  University*  Ad  Valorem  Tax 

This  measure  to  raise  funds  for  the  state  university  is 
fundamentally  wrong.  It  is  unjust  from  the  standpoint  of 
taxation.  It  violates  all  the  traditions  and  practices  con- 
trolling and  safeguarding  the  handling  of  public  funds.  In 
violation  of  the  present  provisions  of  the  constitution  it 
places  a  yearly  burden  of  over  four  million  dollars  upon  the 
home,  the  farm,  the  business  and  the  industry  and  relieves 
public  service  corporations  from  paying  any  portion  of  the 
tax.  This  measure  places  this  large  sum,  which  increases 
yearly  at  the  rate  of  about  seven  per  cent,  without  reserva- 
tion in  the  hands  of  the  board  of  regents  of  the  university. 
The  people  will  have  no  control  of  this  money  either  through 
the  Legislature  or  by  initiative  legislation,  unless  they  again 
amend  the  constitution.  Therefore,  this  ad  valorem  tax 
now  proposed  is  not  the  same  as  the  old  ad  valorem  tax 
which  was  formerly  levied  for  the  university.  The  old  tax 
was  levied  by  the  Legislature  and  subject  to  positive  control 
by  the  Legislature  and  responsive  to  public  desire  and  de- 
mand. For  years  California  provided  a  mill  tax  for  the 
university  and  at  this  time  other  states  provide  mill  taxes 
for  their  universities,  but  the  public  funds  so  raised  were 
and  are  properly  safeguarded  by  provisions  which  are  en- 
tirely lacking  in  the  measure  now  before  the  people.  This 
measure  sets  aside  public  funds  not  only  beyond  control  of 
the  people,  but  in  excess  of  the  present  necessity  of  the  uni- 
versity. At  present  there  is  annually  appropriated  to  the 


A  Mill  Tax  for  Higher  Educational  Institutions        85 

university  out  of  public  funds  slightly  over  two  rand  one-half 
million  dollars.  This  measure  adds  to  that  the  sum  of  one 
and  one-half  million  dollars,  while  the  actual  additional 
needs  of  the  university  have  been  stated  by  friends  of  the 
university  to  be  not  in  excess  of  one  million  dollars  a  year. 
This  measure  places  the  university  in  a  much  favored  posi- 
tion ahead  of  the  public  schools,  of  the  courts,  of  the  state 
functions  for  public  safety,  and  ahead  of  the  support  of  our 
dependents  and  the  care  of  our  widowed  mothers  and  or- 
phaned children.  It  is  preposterous  that  a  measure  of  this 
kind  should  be  presented  for  public  approval.  Surely  the 
voters  of  this  state  will  not  approve  a  measure  which  levies 
upon  the  man  unequal  and  unjust  tax,  which  places  public 
funds  beyond  proper  control,  and  sets  such  funds  aside  re- 
gardless of  other  equally  meritorious  or  more  necessary 
needs.  The  measure  should  be  defeated. 

CLYDE  L.  LEAVEY. 

/ 

EXTRACT  FROM  AN  ADDRESS  DELIVERED  BY  GEO. 

SPENCER  WRIGHT  TO  A  MEETING  OF  THE 

EX-STUDENTS'  ASSOCIATION,  AUG.,  1921 

Seventy-six  years  ago  the  builders  of  this  great  common- 
wealth directed  the  Legislature,  as  soon  as  practicable,  to 
establish  and  provide  for  the  maintenance  and  support  of  a 
"university  of  the  first  class."  At  that  time  Texas  was 
thinly  settled  and  poor  in  resources.  Since  then  it  has 
reached  the  position  of  the  fifth  state  in  population  and 
among  the  first  in  material  resources,  and  yet  this  univer- 
sity trails  behind  the  educational  institutions  of  states  with 
smaller  population  and  resources. 

The  universities  of  Iowa,  Indiana,  Michigan.  Minnesota, 
Missouri,  Nebraska,  Wisconsin  and  other  smaller  states 
have  received  for  many  years  larger  legislative  appropria- 
tions than  the  Texas  University.  Michigan,  Minnesota,  and 
Nebraska  point  with  pride  to  their  great  universities  built 
from  generous  appropriations  and  direct  taxation  encour- 
aged, if  not  demanded,  by  a  people  eager  to  build  universi- 
ties of  the  first  class. 


86  University  of  Texas  Bulletin 

For  almost  three  quarters  of  a  century  Texas  has  been 
so  parsimonious  with  its  university  that  many  young  men 
and  women  have  gone  to  other  states  for  their  education, 
and  hundreds  of  our  university  students  have  borne  the  heat 
of  our  torrid  summers  and  the  cold  of  our  varying  winters 
in  wooden  shacks  that  mar  the  beauty  of  the  campus  and 
which  would  reflect  but  little  credit  on  an  ordinary  "wild 
cat"  oil  development  camp. 

The  total  amount  necessary  for  the  support  of  all  the  state 
educational  institutions,  as  estimated  for  each  year  of  the 
next  legislative  biennium,  is,  in  round  figures,  $9.500,000. 
The  estimated  taxable  values  in  the  state  for  the  next  two 
fiscal  years  amount  to  approximately  $3,400.' >00,000  and 
$3,500,000,000  each  year.  If  the  amounts  necessary  for  the 
support  of  all  the  educational  institutions  were  placed 
roughly  at  $10,000,000  per  annum  a  fixed  tax  of  3i/2  mills 
for  each  year  would,  on  the  basis  of  an  increased  valuation 
from  year  to  year,  provide  the  revenue  desired  by  these 
institutions.  If  the  constitution  should  be  amended  so  as 
to  provide  for  a  tax  of  3%  mills  per  year,  solely  for  the 
support  of  these  educational  institutions,  and  permit  the 
Legislature  to  increase  the  millage  basis  every  five  years, 
the  funds  necessary  for  all  these  institutions  and  the  build- 
ing of  a  university  of  the  first  class  would  be  provided. 
Among  the  states  that  have  provided  this  character  of  tax 
are  the  following:  Arkansas,  Colorado,  Illinois,  Indiana, 
Kentucky,  Michigan,  Minnesota,  Montana,  Nebraska,  Ne- 
vada, Ohio,  Oregon,  Tennessee,  Washington,  and  Wisconsin. 

One-third  of  a  cent  on  the  taxable  values  of  Texas  each 
year  for  the  support  and  maintenance  of  these  institutions 
would  not  appear  as  too  much  to  ask  the  people  »»f  this  state. 
If  you  and  I  shall  do  our  full  duty  in  a  movement  for  this 
tax,  if  the  subject  shall  be  placed  fairly  and  fully  before  the 
people,  they  shall  be  ashamed  to  vote  against  it.  Permit  nie 
to  suggest  that  we  begin  now  a  concerted  movement  for  this 
constitutional  amendment,  and  that  each  of  us  pledge  our 
services  in  the  movement  until  it  shall  become  i  part  of  the 
organic  law  of  this  state. 


A  Mill  Tax  for  Higher  Educational  Institutions        87 

If  we,  as  the  beneficiaries  of  the  university,  saall  succeed 
in  securing  funds  for  the  upbuilding  and  support  of  a  uni- 
versity of  the  first  class,  we  shall  render  distinct  service 
to  the  university,  the  state  and  posterity;  and  when  such 
amendment  has  been  adopted,  we  shall  return  here  to  cele- 
brate a  new  day,  the  University  of  Texas  Independence  Day 
— her  independence  of  sordid  politics,  independence  of  leg- 
islative appropriations,  an  independence  that  shall  permit 
it  to  stand,  not  second,  third  or  fourth,  but  as  a  "university 
of  the  first  class." 

FACTS  CONCERNING  THE  CRISIS  AT  THE  STATE 

UNIVERSITY,   AGRICULTURAL    COLLEGE    AND 

NORMAL  SCHOOL,  AS   COPIED  FROM  THE 

OFFICIAL  VOTERS'  PAMPHLET  OF  THE 

STATE  OF  OREGON 

Submitted  by  R.  S.  Bean,  President  of  the  Board  of  Regents 
of  the  University  of  Oregon ;  J.  K.  Weatherf ord,  Presi- 
dent of  the  Board  of  Regents  of  the  Oregon  Agricul- 
tural College,  and  Ben  W.  Olcott,  President  of  the 
Board  of  Regents  of  the  Oregon  Normal  School. 

1.     Higher  Educational  Institutions  Forced  to  Appeal 

for  Relief 

A  financial  crisis  is  upon  the  Oregon  Agricultural  College, 
the  State  University,  and  the  Oregon  Normal  School.  It 
is  due  to  causes  over  which  they  have  no  control.  Upon 
this  crisis,  the  joint  ways  and  means  committee  of  the  last 
Legislature  held  a  hearing.  The  committee  found  the  three 
institutions  in  desperate  need.  It  found  that  they  should 
not  wait  even  until  next  year.  Accordingly  it  recommended 
to  the  Legislature  an  additional  levy  of  1.26*  mills  for  sup- 
port, beginning  in  1921,  and  an  appropriation  of  like  amount 
for  this  year  alone.  The  Legislature  itself  was  barred  by 
the  six  per  cent  tax  limitation  from  making  the  levy  and 
appropriation,  so  it  referred  the  bill  te  the  people,  and  di- 
rected that  two  pages  be  set  aside  in  this  pamphlet  to 


88  University  of  Texas  Bulletin 

explain  the  facts  to  the  voters.  The  voters  are  to  decide 
May  21,  and  as  many  of  the  facts  as  can  be  contained  in  two 
pages  will  now  be  set  forth. 

2.     One  Cause  of  Crisis  Is  the  Remarkable  Increase  in 
Number  of  Students 

Since  the  original  millage  bill  went  into  effect  in  1913 
the  number  of  full-time  residence  students  at  the  agricul- 
tural college  and  the  state  university  has  increased  one 
hundred  and  fifty  per  cent.  At  the  agricultural  college  in 
1913  there  were  1364  full-time  students;  there  are  now 
3378.  At  the  state  university  in  1913  there  were  691  full- 
time  students;  there  are  now  1745.  The  institutions  have 
tried  hard  to  make  income  meet  maintenance  costs  in  the 
face  of  this  remarkable  growth,  but  have  been  unable  to 
do  so. 

4,     Meanwhile  Their  Income  Is  Further  Reduced  by 
i*.  Great  Upheaval  of  Costs 

Not  only  has  the  number  of  students  increased  one  hun- 
dred and  fifty  per  cent,  but  in  the  same  seven  years  the 
cost  of  supplies  and  equipment  has  doubled.  (This  is  not 
true  of  faculty  salaries,  which  have  necessarily  been  in- 
creased very  little.)  The  buying  power  of  the  dollar  of 
1913  is  today  about  45  cents.  The  experience  of  the  three 
institutions  has  been  the  same  as  the  experience  of  every 
Oregon  family.  It  is  as  if  a  family  of  four  in  1913,  with  an 
income  of  $2000,  has  been  increased  to  a  family  of  ten  in 
1920,  with  an  income  of  $900.  And  with  the  attendance 
one  and  one-half  times  as  great,  and  the  buying  power  of 
the  existing  income  cut  squarely  in  two,  the  millage  tax 
revenue  has  remained  almost  unchanged. 

4.     Millage  Income  Little  Changed  Because  of  Policy  on 
Assessed  Valuations 

The  millage  tax  revenue  has  stood  almost  still  because  as- 
sessed valuations  in  Oregon  remain  about  on  the  same  basis 


A  Mill  Tax  for  Higher  Educational  Institutions        89 

as  they  were  in  1913.  It  was  the  expectation  of  the  Leg- 
islature, of  the  tax  commission,  and  of  all  concerned,  when 
the  present  millage  support  was  passed,  that  the  annual  rise 
in  assessed  valuations  would  equal  increase  in  maintenance. 
How  conspicuously  it  has  failed  to  do  so  is  shown  by  the 
following  table : 

1913  ' $954,282,374 

.1914  932,413,080 

1915  934,495,032. 

1916  878,763,944 

1917  928,605,570 

1918  987,533,896 

1919 990,435,472 

That  is,  the  increase  in  the  state's  assessed  valuation  since 
the  millage  bills  were  passed  in  1913  has  been  three  and 
eight-tenths  per  cent,  while  the  increase  in  student  enroll- 
ment has  been  one  hundred  and  fifty  per  cent,  and  the  in- 
crease in  operating  costs  about  one  hundred  per  cent. 

Further,  the  number  of  students  described,  totaling  about 
5400  at  the  three  institutions,  includes  only  full-time  stu- 
dents, and  does  not  include  the  many  thousands  who  take 
winter  short  courses,  summer  schools,  extension  classes, 
or  correspondence  study.  All  of  these  also  have  to  be 
financed,  however,  from  the  millage  tax  income,  and  their 
number,  too,  has  increased  tremendously. 

5.     When  Expressed  in  Terms  of  Dollars  Crisis 
Becomes  Apparent 

In  actual  dollars  the  state  university  is  receiving  only 
$10,846  more  than  it  would  have  received  in  1913  from  the 
millage  tax  income,  but  it  has  1054  more  full-time  students. 
The  agricultural  college  is  receiving  only  $14,462  more, 
but  it  has  2014  more  students.  The  normal  is  receiving 
only  $1445  more. 

Had  it  not  been  for  thrifty  and  far-sighted  administra- 
tion, the  three  institutions  would  long  before  now  have  been 
turning  students  away.  A  pre-war  report  of  the  United 


90  University  of  Texas  Bulletin 

States  Bureau  of  Education  gave  the  average  cost  per  stu- 
dent per  year  at  $325  in  the  great  number  of  American  uni- 
versities and  colleges  that  entered  into  the  calculation.  At 
the  state  university  this  year,  however,  in  spite  of  the  rise 
in  prices,  the  cost  per  student  is  $203,  and  at  the  college 
$180.  Even  with  the  new  millage  bill  in  effect  the  cost  in 
Oregon  would  still  be  below  the  average  for  institutions 
of  similar  grade.  The  annual  student  cost  at  the  agricul- 
tural college,  as  an  example,  would  still  be  $70  a  year  below 
the  annual  student  cost  at  a  typical  group  of  five  agricul- 
tural schools  in  the  Middle  West  and  the  West — those  of 
Michigan,  Iowa,  Kansas,  Indiana,  and  Washington.  (Note: 
In  addition,  the  costs  of  the  five  colleges  mentioned  were 
taken  from  a  four-year  period  preceding  the  war,  when 
costs  were  about  one-half  what  they  are  now.) 

6.  They  Find  Themselves  Unable  to  "Make  Ends  Meet" 

Any  Longer 

The  state  university,  agricultural  college,  and  normal  have 
at  last  "come  to  the  end  of  their  rope."  The  war  piled  on 
burdens  that  made  universities  and  colleges  everywhere 
stagger.  •  It  not  only  raised  prices  to  the  breaking  point 
for  them,  just  as  it  did  for  every  man's  household,  but  it 
compelled  them  to  add  branches  of  study,  to  intensify  their 
work,  to  whip  up  their  speed ;  for  few  agencies  rose  to  meet 
the  call  of  the  war  as  did  the  universities  and  colleges  of 
the  country.  The  war  also  showed  hundreds  of  thousands 
of  men  the  wonderful  value  of  a  college  education.  Nearly 
1500  ex-service  men  have  hurried  to  the  state  university 
and  the  agricultural  college  alone.  Welcome  as  they  were, 
they  have  nevertheless  helped  to  create  a  problem  that  can 
not  be  met  without  more  aid  from  the  state. 

7.  Shortage  of  Classroom  Space  Is  as  Great  as  Shortage 

of  Maintenance  Funds 

Classroom  conditions  at  the  college  and  university  are 
almost  impossible.  It  is  natural  that  they  should  be  when 


A  Mill  Tax  for  Higher  Educational  Institutions        91 

it  is  remembered  that  the  buildings  of  1913  were  even  then 
insufficient,  and  that  the  number  of  students  has  increased 
ten  times  faster  than  classroom  space.  Out  of  the  dozens 
of  possible  illustrations  there  is  room  in  these  two  pages 
for  one  or  two  only.  At  the  university  the  sciences  have  the 
laboratory  and  classroom  facilities  sufficient  for  an  institu- 
tion of  about  700,  instead  of  one  of  1745.  The  university 
library  was  built  when  the  student  body  numbered  400, 
and  has  study  facilities  for  211  at  one  time.  At  the  agri- 
cultural college  students  are  shifted  all  over  the  campus  to 
find  room  at  all,  then  are  constantly  crowded  into  wholly 
unsuitable  quarters.  The  teaching  efficiency  of  the  two  in- 
stitutions is  fast  being  broken  down  by  lack  of  classrooms 
and  laboratories. 

8.     Salary  Conditions  Result  in  Steady*  Loss  of  Best 
Faculty  Men 

The  cost  of  living  has  risen  probably  about  90  per  cent 
in  Oregon  since  1915.  Faculty  salaries  at  the  university, 
college  and  normal  have  advanced  about  20  per  cent  since 
that  time.  The  result  has  been  a  steady  loss  to  the  state 
from  its  best  faculty  material.  Teachers  can  not  be  ex- 
pected to  stay  on  indefinitely  out  of  loyalty  when  they  have 
to  borrow  from  banks,  or  dip  into  previous  savings  to  keep 
their  families  supported.  At  the  agricultural  college  alone 
there  have  been  forty-five  faculty  resignations  since  July, 
1919.  Some  go  to  the  branches  of  industry  in  which  they 
are  specialists,  for  one  of  the  great  lessons  of  the  world  war 
was  the  unrealized  value  of  the  technical  training  of  the 
university  and  college  professor.  Others  go  to  states  that 
have  already  met  the  crisis  in  their  higher  educational  in- 
stitutions by  providing  more  adequate  funds. 

Yet  it  is  vitally  important  that  many  of  these  faculty 
members  be  kept  in  the  state,  and  in  particular  the  technical 
specialists.  Professors  of  agriculture,  horticulture,  dairy- 
ing, animal  husbandry,  education  and  child  study,  journal- 
ism, commerce,  engineering,  forestry,  and  such  practical 


92  University  of  Texas  Bulletin 

branches,  come  to  their  highest  worth  in  a  state  only  after 
years  of  service.  New  men  can  not  learn  Oregon  in  a  sea- 
son or  two. 

9.  Why  Higher  Education  Pays  in  General  and 

Why  It  Pays  in  Oregon 

Higher  education  puts  dollars  into  the  pockets  of  thou- 
sands of  Oregon  citizens.  The  feat  of  the  agricultural  col- 
lege in  increasing  the  grain  output  per  acre  has  alone  added 
more  to  the  wealth  of  Oregon  for  each  year  than  the  entire 
cost  of  higher  education  for  the  same  year.  So  has  the 
work  of  the  college  in  reducing  the  fruit  pests.  So  has  its 
achievement  in  raising  the  egg-laying  average  and  in  im- 
proving the  livestock.  In  a  less  visible  but  no  less  direct 
way  the  university  and  the  normal  are  making  +heir  contri- 
butions to  the  wealth  of  the  state. 

Higher  education  is  a  safeguard  against  anarchy  on  the 
one  hand,  and  against  aristocracy  and  reaction  on  the  other. 
Nearly  all  the  inventions  that  helped  win  the  war  were  con- 
tributions of  college  professors  or  college-trained  men. 
Educated  men  and  women  produce  more  and  save  more. 
The  arrival  in  the  business  and  industrial  world  in  the  last 
fifteen  years  of  a  great  number  of  young  men  of  broad  uni- 
versity training  has  helped  make  America  the  business  and 
industrial  leader  of  the  whole  world.  It  has  helped  bring 
the  worker  and  the  employer  closer  together,  and  to  improve 
the  social  and  financial  position  of  the  former.  Higher  ed- 
ucation in  Oregon  has  been  one  of  the  strongest  factors  in 
bringing  in  settlers  to  populate  a  vast  region  that  at  the 
present  averages  only  nine  persons  to  the  square  mile. 

10.  What  the  Effect  on  Taxes  Would  Be,  if  You 

Happen  to  Be  a  Taxpayer 

Assessed  valuations  in  Oregon  usually  vary  from  one- 
third  to  two-thirds  of  the  so-called  "cash  valuation/'  which 
in  its  turn  is  generally  lower  than  the  "asked  price/'  A 


A  Mill  Tax  for  Higher  Educational  Institutions        93 

man  paying  on  $1000  of  assessed  valuation  would  have 
$1.26  added  to  his  annual  statement.  As  the  prevailing  tax 
levies  run,  including  the  special  levies  for  roads  and  towns 
and  local  schools,  his  increase  would  usually  range  from 
one-twenty-fifth  to  one-fortieth. 

That  is,  it  would  add  from  two  and  one-half  to  four  per 
cent  to  his  annual  taxes  to  have  the  agricultural  college,  the 
university  and  the  normal  of  his  state  placed  on  a  footing 
that  would  let  them  remain  the  equals  of  the  higher  educa- 
tional institutions  of  neighboring  and  Middle  West  States, 
and  make  it  possible  for  him  to  educate  his  boy  and  girl  at 
home,  without  going  to  the  far  greater  expense  of  sending 
them  away  from  the  state. 

11.  If  You  Were  the  Person  Responsible  for  Higher  Edu- 

cation, What  Would  You  Do? 

Imagine  yourself  to  be  responsible  for  the  carrying  on 
of  higher  education  in  Oregon.  The  institutions  for  which 
you  have  this  responsibility  have  been  created  by  the  people 
for  the  education  of  their  boys  and  girls,  for  the  spread  of 
good  citizenship,  for  educational  extension  to  the  state  gen- 
erally, and  for  the  perpetuation  of  the  Republic's  free  in- 
stitutions. 

Suppose  that  you  have  been  provided  by  the  people  with 
what  they  expected  at  the  time  would  be  an  adequate  mill- 
age  income.  Unexpectedly  to  them  and  to  you,  however, 
the  income  fails  to  meet  growth,  fails  to  meet  the  unfor- 
seen  conditions  created  by  a  world  war.  In  fact,  the  income 
stands  almost  still. 

Meanwhile  your  costs  begin  to  go  up,  up,  up.  They  double 
in  seven  years.  Your  dollars  become  worth  45  cents  of 
their  old  buying  power.  Your  buildings  are  depreciating 
Your  equipment  is  wearing  out. 

And,  on  top  of  it  all,  your  student  enrollment  jumps 
one  hundred  and  fifty  per  cent. 

12.  What  Would  You  Do  if  These  Things  Happened  to  You? 
Would  you  close  up  your  doors?    Or  would  you  let  your 


94  University  of  Texas  Bulletin 

whole  educational  system  break  down  ? 

Or  would  you  go  frankly  before  the  people,  make  the  facts 
known  to  them,  and  ask  for  the  increase  in  income  that  has 
been  necessary  in  every  other  activity? 

If  you  would  do  this  last,  it  is  then  your  consistent  duty 
to  vote  for  the  Higher  Educational  Tax  Act. 

(Note:  Just  before  this  copy  went  to  the  Secretary  of 
State,  on  March  1,  the  Higher  Educational  Tax  Act  was  en- 
dorsed by  the  State  Taxpayers'  League  at  its  annual  meeting 
in  Portland.  The  measure  had  previously  been  endorsed  by 
the  Oregon  Newspaper  Conference  and  by  the  Oregon  Retail 
Merchants  Association.  Many  other  organizations  were 
preparing  to  endorse  it,  and  dozens  will  doubtless  do  so 
between  this  date,  March  1,  and  May  21.) 
(Signed)  R.  S.  BEAN, 

President,  Board  of  Regents, 

University*  of  Oregon. 
J.  K.  WEATHERFORD. 
President,  Board  of  Regents, 

Oregon  Agricultural  College. 
BEN  W.  OLCOTT, 
President,  Board  of  Regents, 
Oregon  Normal  School. 

THE  CRISIS 

Extract  from  Worker's  Handbook,  published  by  the  Montana  Univer- 
sity Funds   Campaign   Committee   in  July,   1920 

No  longer  can  the  university  institutions  of  Montana,  in- 
cluding the  State  University  at  Missoula,  the  State  College 
of  Agriculture  and  Mechanic  Arts  at  Bozeman,  the  State 
Normal  College  at  Dillon  and  the  State  School  of  Mines  at 
Butte,  perform  efficiently  the  tasks  which  have  been  as- 
signed to  them.  Their  present  income  is  wholly  insuffi- 
cient. They  find  themselves  confronted  by  long  accumu- 
lating needs  for  more  buildings  for  instruction  and  supple- 
mentary student  activities,  for  more  books  and  scientific 
apparatus  and  technical  equipment,  for  better  libraries  and 


A  Mill  Tax  for  Higher  Educational  Institutions        95 

laboratories,  and  for  more  and  better  living  accommoda- 
tions for  the  students. 

They  a*re  confronted  also  by  an  acute  situation  resulting 
from: 

1.  A  greatly  increased  number  of  students. 

2.  The  need  for  higher  salaries  to  attract  and  hold  strong 
teachers  and  able  investigators  under  present  living  costs. 

3.  Rapidly  rising  costs  of  all  supplies. 

4.  Demands  for  new  types  of  service — extension  work, 
correspondence  classes,  boys'  and  girls'  club  work,  mining 
bureau  service. 

None  the  less  urgent  are  the  needs  of  those  institutions 
which  have  been  established  for  the  care  and  education  of 
th  defective,  delinquent  and  dependent  children  of  the  state : 
the  Orphans'  Home  at  Twin  Bridges,  the  State  School  for 
the  Deaf  and  Blind  at  Boulder,  the  State  Industrial  School 
at  Miles  City,  and  the  State  Vocational  School  for  Girls  at 
Helena.  The  demands  upon  these  institutions  greatly  ex- 
ceed the  facilities  now  provided.  The  educational  system  of 
Montana  will  be  sadly  lacking  until  all  these  wards  of  the 
state  are  given  their  rightful  opportunity  to  be  educated 
as  far  as  possible  for  self-supporting  citizenship. 

Most  serious  of  all,  in  the  face  of  the  needs  above  indi- 
cated, the  state  institutions  are  threatened  with  a  reduction 
in  their  present  inadequate  state  income.  This  reduction  is 
due  to  the  constitutional  provision  that  when  the  valuation 
of  the  real  and  personal  property  in  the  state  amounts  to  six 
hundred  million  dollars  ($600,000,000),  a  total  already 
reached,  the  tax  levy  for  state  purposes,  unless  otherwise 
voted  by  the  people,  shall  be  reduced  from  2 1/2  mills  to  2 
mills.  Out  of  the  present  tax  levy  of  2%  mills  the  state 
government,  boards  and  bureaus,  the  penitentiary,  the  in- 
sane asylum,  and  the  welfare  institutions  require  approx- 
imately li/2  mills;  the  university  institutions  receive  for 
maintenance  approximately  1  mill.  As  the  former  group 
can  be  operated  at  this  time  only  with  increased  cost,  it  is 
clear  that  the  funds  available  from  taxation  for  the  state 


96  University  of  Texas  Bulletin 

schools  will  be  greatly  reduced  unless  the  people  vote  other- 
wise. The  reduction  in  the  state  income  for  next  year  is 
estimated  at  $300,000. 

The  Relief 

Relief  in  this  crisis  can  come  only  from  the  people.  It 
can  not  come  from  legislative  action.  For,  under  the  con- 
stitution, any  increase  in  the  constitutional  state  tax  levy 
or  any  bonded  indebtedness  must  be  voted  by  the  people. 

Hence  two  laws  have  been  initiated  to  be  voted  on  in 
November.  (A)  No.  18  provides  for  a  maintenance  tax  for 
the  university  institutions.  (B)  No.  19  provides  for  a  bond 
issue  to  erect  buildings  at  all  the  state  educational  institu- 
tions. 

'Initiative  Measure  No.  18 
Maintenance  Tax  Law 

This  measure  provides  that  each  year  for  the  next  ten 
years  the  levy  on  all  taxable  property  for  state  purposes 
shall  be  increased  to  3%  mills — that  is  one  mill  more  than 
the  present  state  tax.  The  proceeds  from  one  and  one-half 
mills  of  this  levy  shall  be  appropriated  by  the  State  Legis- 
lature for  the  maintenance  of  the  university  institutions — 
the  State  University  at  Missoula,  the  State  College  of  Agri- 
culture and  Mechanic  Arts  at  Bozeman,  the  State  Normal 
College  at  Dillon  and  the  State  School  of  Mines  at  Butte. 

Initiative  Measure  No.  19 
Bond  Issue  Law 

This  measure  provides  for  the  issuance  of  state  bonds, 
under  the  authority  of  the  State  Board  of  Examiners,  to  the 
amount  of  five  million  dollars  ($5,000,000)  to  draw  interest 
at  the  rate  of  not  more  than  5  Vfc  per  cent,  to  be  sold  at  not 
less  than  par,  to  be  payable  in  twenty  years,  and  to  be  re- 
deemable at  any  time  aften  ten  years.  The  proceeds  of 


A  Mill  Tax  for  Higher  Educational  Institutions        97 

these  bonds  are  to  be  used  only  for  the  construction,  repair, 
and  equipment  of  buildings;  three  million  seven  hundred 
and  fifty  dollars  ($3,750,000)  at  the  four  university  institu- 
tions named  above,  and  one  million  two  hundred  and  fifty 
thousand  dollars  ($1,250,000)  at  the  four  non-university  in- 
stitutions, also  under  the  direction  of  the  State  Board  of 
Education — the  State  Industrial  School  at  Miles  City,  the 
State  Vocational  School  for  Girls  at  Helena,  the  State  Or- 
phans' Home  at  Twin  Bridges,  and  the  State  School  for  the 
Deaf  and  Blind  at  Boulder.  This  measure  carries  a  state 
tax  of  not  to  exceed  10/12  mill  for  interest  and  sinking  fund. 
This  tax  has  been  computed  at  a  rate  which  will  pay  the 
interest  and  principal  of  these  bonds  within  ten  to  twenty 
years. 

The  immediate  result  of  the  passage  of  Initiative  Measure 
No.  18  will  be  to  increase  the  state's  maintenance  funds  by 
one-half  mill  and  to  increase  the  present  one-mill  appro- 
priation for  the  university  maintenance  to  li/2  mills.  This 
will  afford  with  the  income  from  the  federal  government, 
a  conservative  sum  for  the  maintenance  of  the  four  univer- 
sity institutions  and  by  taking  off  the  pressure  upon  the 
state  levy  for  general  purposes,  will  indirectly  provide  for 
the  growing  maintenance  needs  of  the  four  non-university 
institutions  and  of  the  other  state  activities. 

The  immediate  result  of  the  passage  of  Initiative  Measure 
No.  19  will  be  to  supply  a  reasonable  sum  for  the  long  post- 
poned and  urgent  building  and  equipment  needs  of  all  the 
state  educational  institutions,  both  for  those  in  the  univer- 
sity and  for  the  four  non-university  institutions. 

No  other  measures  have  been  proposed  which  would  pro- 
vide a  proper  increase  in  the  state  revenues  whereby  the 
higher  and  special  schools  may  be  kept  in  effective  operation. 

The  Effect  on  Taxes  Fully  Explained 

The  two  proposed  measures,  No.  18  and  No.  19,  carry  a 
total  increase  of  the  state  tax  levy  of  2Vi  mills,  l*/2  mills 
in  the  university  maintenance  tax  law  (No.  18)  and  10/12 


98  University  of  Texas  Bulletin 

of  a  mill  in  the  educational  bond  law  (No.  19).  The  con- 
stitution provides  that  when  the  property  valuation  of  the 
state  reaches  six  hundred  million  dollars  ($600,000,000), 
the  state  tax  levy  shall  be  reduced  from  21/2  mills  to  2  mills. 
Since  it  is  certain  that  this  year  the  property  valuation  has 
exceeded  six  hundred  million  dollars  ($600,000,000),  the 
actual  increase  in  the  state  tax,  provided  by  Measure  No. 
18  and  No.  19,  will  be  1  5/6  mills  more  than  that  now 
actually  in  force. 

Some  Further  Reasons 
Measures  Are  Financially  Sound 

The  plan  of  a  millage  tax  for  the  support  of  the  university 
institutions  is  now  followed  in  fifteen  of  the  most  impor- 
tant states  of  the  West  and  may  be  called  a  standard  method 
in  these  states  where  the  educational  institutions  are  most 
successf ul.Among  them  are  Michigan,  Ohio,  Indiana,  Ilinois, 
Wisconsin,  Minnesota,  Nebraska,  Colorado,  Washington, 
and  Oregon. 

The  issuance  of  bonds  for  the  construction  of  buildings 
has  also  been  widely  employed.  The  issue  of  bo/ids  for  this 
purpose  is  good  business,  and  it  is  social  justice.  It  is  the 
height  of  absurdity  to  make  the  current  reveiues  of  the 
state  pay  for  capital  investments  that  will  serve  the  people 
for  generations  to  come.  The  dividends  from  these  invest- 
ments will  be  great,  but  they  will  accrue  mainly  to  the  fu- 
ture, for  the  simple  reason  that  they  are  educational  in- 
vestments. Our  sons  and  daughters  will  thank  us  for  mak- 
ing these  investments,  and  will  pay  them  glad'y — and  far 
more  easily  by  virtue  of  the  training  they  get  in  these 
schools. 

Montana  Is  Losing  Money 

Montana  loses  a  quarter  of  a  million  dollars  a  year,  it  is 
said,  through  the  young  people  who  seek  a  college  education 
outside  the  state.  The  estimate  has  been  made  that  250 


A  Mill  Tax  for  Higher  Educational  Institutions        99 

students  a  year  spending  on  the  average  $1000  each  are 
attending  the  educational  institutions  outside  the  state 
Some  of  these  go  outside  for  family  reasons,  but  many  of 
them  would  stay  in  the  state  if  the  institutions  were  better 
equipped  and  supported.  Many  of  them,  if  not  most  of 
them,  are  attending  state-supported  schools. 

Take  the  University  Institutions  Out  of  Legislative 
Competition 

In  order  to  secure  funds  the  university  institutions  must 
now  compete  before  the  Legislature  with  the  other  interests 
and  undertakings  of  the  state.  To  most  persons  this  seems 
unfair  to  the  university  institutions  and  tends  to  lower  their 
dignity,  and  limit  their  efficiency. 

The  common  schools  and  the  high  schools  do  not  have  to 
go  before  the  city  councils  and  the  county  commissioners 
and  compete  for  support  against  roads,  poor  houses,  jails, 
health  officers,  county  deputies,  etc.  They  have  their  own 
fixed  funds  raised  for  them  and  not  subject  to  political  trad- 
ing or  to  competition  with  other  public  purposes,  which, 
however  meritorious,  are  often  less  essential. 

These  two  measures  will  place  the  state  institutions  in  the 
same  relation  financially  to  their  constituency,  the  people  of 
the  state,  that  the  local  schools  are  in  to  the  people  of  the 
district,  the  town,  or  the  county. 

Bring  the  University  Up  to  the  Standard  of  the 
Montana  Public  Schools 

The  recent  survey  of  the -school  systems  of  the  United 
States  placed  those  of  Montana  in  the  lead.  This  was  due 
solely  to  the  excellence  of  the  grade  and  high  schools.  The 
children  coming  from  these  schools  in  increasingly  greater 
numbers  should  not  experience  a  lowering  in  standards  in 
passing  to  the  institutions  of  higher  learning.  Yet  this  must 
result  if  the  people  of  the  state  do  not  support  the  state 
schools  as  the  public  schools  are  supported  by  the  commu- 
nities in  which  they  are  situated. 


100  University  of  Texas  Bulletin 

Since  January  1,  1920,  Ouster  County  has  voted  more 
money  for  a  new  county  high  school  building,  and  the  Mis- 
soula  city  school  district  has  voted  more  money  for  new 
grade  school  buildings  than  any  of  the  university  institu- 
tions has  had  for  permanent  buildings  during  the  last  ten 
years.  These  examples  are  not  exceptions  but  are  to  be 
found  at  place  after  place  throughout  the  state.  If  the 
people  of  the  state  desire  that  their  children  should  go  to 
college  in  Montana,  the  physical  standards  of  the  university 
must  be  brought  up  to  the  grade  of  the  public  schools. 

An  Opinion   Worth  Reading 
The  Efficiency  Commission 

The  Sixteenth  Legislative  Assembly  (1919)  created  a 
state  efficiency  commission  to  investigate  the  financial  and 
business  policy  of  the  state.  The  members  of  this  commis- 
sion were  Hon.  Frank  Eliel  of  Dillon  (chairman),  Hon.  N. 
T.  Lease  of  Great  Falls  and  Hon.  W.  0.  Fisk  of  Hamilton. 
After  visiting  all  the  state  educational  institutions  the  com- 
mission reported  to  the  Governor : 

"The  ambitious  youth  of  Montana  has  a  right  to  demand 
that  the  state  provide  the  opportunities  and  facilities  for 
obtaining  higher  education.  Under  present  conditions  the 
state  is  failing  to  perform,  effectively,  the  duty  which  it  owes 
to  our  young  manhood  and  womanhood.  Many  of  our  most 
promising  boys  and  girls  belong  to  families  of  most  limited 
financial  resources.  The  state  will  not  be  fair  to  the  youth 
of  Montana  if  it  fails  to  place  the  opportunities  for  higher 
education  within  their  reach.  , 

"It  is  a  matter  of  general  observation  that  many  of  our 
young  men  and  women  leave  this  state  in  seeking  their  uni- 
versity training.  This  entails  an  annual  drain  of  a  consid- 
erable sum  of  money  from  the  productive  channels  of  the 
state.  Many  of  the  most  competent  of  these  young  men  and 
women  are  lost  to  the  future  of  Montana,  since  they  take 
up  their  life-work  elsewhere. 

"This  condition  can  not  be  corrected  as  long  as  our  edu- 


A  Mill  Tax  for  Higher  Educational -Institutions' :    101 

cational  institutions  are  dependent  almost  entirely  upon 
appropriations  for  the  money  necessary,  not  only  for  main- 
tenance, but  also  for  the  erection  of  buildings.  The  rev- 
enues of  the  state  are  insufficient  and  can  not  readily  be 
increased.  It  will  be  necessary  to  go  to  the  people  them- 
selves for  authority  to  supply  the  needed  funds. 

"The  needs  (i.e.,  building  and  equipment)  of  the  educa- 
tional institutions  may  be  provided  for  either  by  a  bond 
issue  or  by  a  special  tax  to  be  levied  during  a  definite  term 
of  years.  Either  plan  would  require  the  approval  of  the 
people.  Of  the  two  the  former  commends  itself  to  this 
commission  as  the  more  desirable. 

"This  matter  is  of  such  a  fundamental  character,  it  is  so 
intimately  connected  with  the  future  welfare  of  the  state 
that  the  members  of  this  commission  have  no  hesitancy  in 
giving  their  full  and  unqualified  endorsement  to  the  propo- 
sition of  asking  the  people  to  authorize  the  necessary  bond 
issue." 

EXTRACT  FROM  AN  ADDRESS  BY  EDWARD  C. 

ELLIOT,  CHANCELLOR  OF  THE  UNIVERSITY 

OF  MONTANA 

More  than  a  quarter  of  a  century  ago  when  forward- 
looking  men  were  engaged  in  laying  the  permanent  founda- 
tions for  this  commonwealth  of  Montana,  it  was  fore- 
ordained that  a  system  of  free  public  education  was  to  be 
set  up.  As  an  integral  part  of  this  system,  and  in  comple- 
tion of  the  guarantee  of  equality  of  opportunity  for  all  the 
youth  of  the  state  there  were  created  four  higher  institu- 
tions— The  State  University  at  Missoula,  The  State  College 
of  Agriculture  and  Mechanic  Arts  at  Bozeman,  The  State 
School  of  Mines  at  Butte,  and  the  State  Normal  College  at 
Dillon. 

From  simple  and  modest  beginnings  these  institutions 
have  in  their  growth  and  expansion  reflected  the  general 
progress  of  the  state.  In  1916  the  four  higher  state  schools 
were  organized  as  component  units  of  the  University  of 


102  University  of  Texas  Bulletin 

Montana.  The  immediate  results  of  the  centralized  organ- 
ization were  coordination  and  harmony  of  educational  effort, 
economy  and  effectiveness  of  financial  operation,  and  the 
elimination  of  those  partisan  and  provincial  influences 
which  for  many  years  have  led  to  disturbing  and  handicap- 
ping controversies. 

During  the  past  year  there  were  enrolled  in  the  four 
University  of  Montana  institutions  approximately  three 
thousand  students,  each  seeking  with  that  ambitious  fore- 
sight, ever  characteristic  of  our  western  youth,  to  become 
fit  for  service  to  self  and  state  by  liberal  education  and  pro- 
fessional training  in  law,  or  forestry,  or  agriculture,  or  en- 
gineering, or  journalism,  or  business  administration,  or 
pharmacy,  or  teaching.  In  this  connection  it  is  pertinent 
to  call  attention  to  the  fact  that  during  the  past  decade  the 
resident  student  attendance  at  the  several  university  insti- 
tutions has  increased  several  times — at  the  State  University 
more  than  four  times,  at  the  College  of  Agriculture  and 
Mechanic  Arts  nearly  twice,  and  at  the  Normal  College 
nearly  four  times.  During  this  period  there  had  been  but 
little  increase  in  buildings  and  equipment  for  instructional 
purposes. 

In  addition  to  the  teaching  of  students  there  has  been 
maintained  the  Agricultural  Experiment  Station  at  Boze- 
man  with  its  four  branch  stations  at  Havre,  Moccasin,  Hunt- 
ley,  and  Corvallis.  Through  the  agricultural  extension  serv- 
ice no  less  than  sixty  thousand  people,  chiefly  of  the  coun- 
try regions,  have  had  carried  to  them  through  agricultural 
experts,  home  demonstration  agents,  and  leaders  of  boys' 
and  girls'  clubs,  practical  assistance  and  inspiration  of  in- 
calculable social  and  economic  benefit  to  the  entire  state. 

Through  the  State  Bureau  of  Mines,  the  services  of  the 
expert  mining  engineers  of  the  State  School  of  Mines  have 
been  made  available  to  hundreds  of  our  people.  The  teach- 
ers' service  division  of  the  Normal  College  has  continued  to 
stimulate  hundreds  of  teachers  to  undertake  better  prepara- 
tion for  their  work.  It  is  more  than  a  mere  figure  of  speech 


A  Mill  Tax  for  Higher  Educational  Institutions      103 

to  say  that  the  campus  of  the  university  now  includes  the 
entire  area  of  the  State  of  Montana. 

Three  forces,  however,  have  recently  operated  to  neutral- 
ize the  gains  from  the  improved  administrative  machinery 
for  the  university,  and  to  create  a  crisis  which  today  threat- 
ens the  very  existence  of  the  university  and  its  works.  This 
crisis  may  be  easily  and  briefly  described. 

Since  the  time  of  their  establishment  state  funds  provided 
for  the  support  and  the  material  expansion  and  equipment 
of  the  higher  educational  institutions  have  been  wholly  in- 
adequate. In  making  this  statement  I  am  not  overlooking 
the  outstanding  fact  that  our  people  have  had,  during  this 
period  of  our  phenomenal  development  from  pioneer  begin- 
nings, to  bear  many  large  public  burdens.  Higher  educa- 
tion was  but  one  among  many  essential  public  enterprises 
demanding  the  attention  of  legislatures  and  the  taxpayer. 
Nevertheless,  the  insufficiency  of  past  support  can  not  be 
ignored.  While  the  state,  during  the  decade  preceding  the 
war  enjoyed  unprecedented  growth  in  population  and  in 
the  development  of  her  great  natural  resources,  it  is  fair 
to  remember  that  during  this  same  time  the  state  made  no 
provision  whatever  for  buildings  for  educational  purposes  at 
any  of  the  educational  institutions.  And  what  is  more  to 
the  point  during  these  years  these  institutions  doubled  and 
trebled  in  student  attendance. 

The  appropriations  from  state  taxation  for  the  mainte- 
nance of  this  comprehensive  and  manifold  undertaking  dur- 
ing the  fiscal  year  amounted  approximately  to  the  revenue 
equivalent  of  one  mill.  The  university  expense  can  not  now 
be  met  from  the  limited  income. 

The  prime  question  before  the  people  of  Montana  today  is 
whether  or  not  the  university  enterprise  shall  be  maintained 
in  a  manner  that  will  enable  it  to  serve  as  it  should  the  in- 
terests of  a  progressive,  productive  state ;  or  whether  Mon- 
tana, which  has  recently  been  awarded  first  rank  among  all 
the  states  of  the  Union  for  its  support  of  elementary  and 
secondary  schools,  shall  follow  a  narrow  and  destructive 


104  University  of  Texas  Bulletin 

policy  towards  its  university.  Shall  the  state  provide  more 
revenue  or  be  content  with  less  university? 

Chief  among-  the  disastrous  results  of  the  Great  War  is 
the  world-wide  diminished  purchasing  power  of  money. 
Here  at  least  is  a  case  where  familiarity  had  not  bred  con- 
tempt. 

Keeping  in  mind  the  insufficient  pre-war  resources,  it  is 
but  natural  that  the  post-war  depreciated  dollar  has  become 
a  real  menace  to  the  life  of  our  educational  institutions. 
The  appropriations  made  by  the  last  Legislature  were  based 
upon  estimates  made  during  the  summer  months  of  1918 
when  the  tide  of  victory  ebbed  and  flowed,  and  when  there 
was  a  recognized  necessity  for  economy  in  public  as  well 
as  private  affairs  if  we  were  to  furnish  the  means  for  the 
victory  for  which  we  were  struggling. 

Will  there  be  any  wonder  or  resentment  on  the  part  of 
rational  men  when  I  say  that  the  university  would  have  been 
unable  to  keep  its  doors  open  to  students  and  to  meet  the 
demands  for  service  from  the  citizens  of  the  state  this  year 
on  the  funds  appropriated  ?  I  estimate  an  operating  deficit 
of  about  one  hundred  and  fifty  thousand  dollars  at  the  end 
of  the  current  fiscal  year.  This  deficit  has  been  offset  by 
withholding  practically  all  of  the  appropriations  for  build- 
ings made  by  the  Sixteenth  Legislature. 

The  germ  of  the  financial  crisis  of  the  university  is  to  be 
found  in  the  fact  that  today  the  State  of  Montana  is  not 
raising  sufficient  revenue  to  meet  its  governmental  and  in- 
stitutional needs.  Our  present  state  tax  of  two  and  one- 
half  mills  is  the  lowest  state  tax  of  any  of  the  neighboring 
northwestern  states.  The  difficulty  in  which  we  find  our- 
selves is  compounded  by  the  fact  that  under  the  constitution 
the  state  tax  will  next  year  be  automatically  reduced  from 
two  and  one-half  mills  to  two  mills.  Instead  of  increased 
revenue  we  are  faced  by  the  prospect  of  increased  poverty. 

It  is  the  firm  conviction  of  myself  and  those  associated 
with  me  in  the  administration  of  the  university  in  its  several 
institutions,  divisions  and  departments  that  we  were  obli- 
gated to  the  people  of  the  state  to  inform  them  of  the  grave 


A  Mill  Tax  for  Higher  Educational  Institutions      105 

situation  in  which  this  important  educational  enterprise 
finds  itself.  The  people,  and  the  people  alone,  have  it  with- 
in their  power  to  decide  the  issue  at  stake.  Therefore  we 
have  proposed  and  have  presented  through  the  initiative 
procedure,  two  measures  carefully  designated  to  afford  re- 
lief. The  first  of  these,  Initiative  Measure  No.  18,  provides 
for  a  state  tax  of  three  and  one-half  mills — one  mill  more 
than  the  present  tax — proceeds  of  one  and  one-half  mills  of 
which  shall  be  appropriated  by  the  Legislature  for  the  oper- 
ating support  of  the  university  institutions.  The  second 
measure,  Initiative  Measure  No.  19,  provides  for  the  issu- 
ance of  state  bonds  to  the  amount  of  five  millions  of  dollars, 
the  proceeds  of  three-fourths  ($3,750,000)  of  which  shall 
be  utilized  for  buildings  and  equipment  for  the  university 
institutions,  and  the  remainder  ($1,250,000)  to  be  devoted 
to  buildings  at  the  several  state  institutions  for  defective 
(Twin  Bridges),  dependent  (Boulder),  and  delinquent 
(Helena  and  Miles  City)  children. 

The  passage  of  these  measures  will  give  the  university  a 
chance  to  do  its  work  in  an  effective  manner,  and  will  secure 
to  the  unfortunate  children,  who  have  become  the  special 
wards  of  the  state,  an  opportunity  to  which  they  are  justly 
entitled. 

EXTRACT  FROM  FIFTEENTH  BIENNIAL  REPORT 

OF  THE  BOARD  OF  REGENTS  OF  THE 

UNIVERSITY  OF  TEXAS 

Need  of  Maintenance  by  Special  Tax  Levy 

The  $655,000  recommended  for  the  first  fiscal  year  and 
the  $720,000  for  the  second,  may  be  provided  either  by  ap- 
propriation from  the  general  revenue,  or  from  the  proceeds 
of  a  special  tax  levy.  We  believe  that  the  latter  is  the  better 
method. 

It  is  generally  agreed  that  the  plan  of  relying  on  appro- 
priations from  the  general  revenue,  made  biennially,  is  open 
to  grave  objections.  A  university,  of  all  institutions,  should 
be  managed  reasonably  and  prudently,  on  the  basis  of  plans 


106  University  of  Texas  Bulletin 

deliberately  decided  upon,  providing  for  an  orderly  devel- 
opment stretching  over  a  series  of  years.  Such  conduct 
of  affairs  is  impossible  under  the  system  of  biennial  appro- 
priations. What  will  be  done  by  legislatures  and  governors 
two,  four  and  six  years  in  the  future  can  not  possibly  be 
foreseen.  This  situation  compels  the  regents  to  pursue  a 
"hand  to  mouth"  policy,  inconsistent  with  the  interests  of 
the  university,  and  destructive  either  of  prudent  or  eco- 
nomical management. 

The  entanglement  of  the  university  in  factional  politics 
constitutes,  if  possible,  a  graver  objection  to  the  system  of 
biennial  appropriations  for  its  maintenance.  The  officers 
of  the  university  should  not  be  called  upon  to  lobby,  however 
important  the  end  to  be  attained  or  unexceptionable  the 
methods  employed.  Men  engaged  in  educational  service 
should  be  free  to  devote  their  best  energies  to  their  high 
functions.  Above  all,  the  university  itself  should  be  so  sup- 
ported as  to  be  wholly  independent  of  partisan  caprice. 

The  plan  of  supporting  the  university  from  the  proceeds 
of  a  special  statutory  tax  has  been  adopted  by  practically 
all  the  strongest  state  universities  of  the  country,  and  we 
recommend  that  the  present  legislature  employ  this  method 
of  providing  for  the  support  of  the  University  of  Texas. 

In  determining  the  rate  of  such  a  special  tax,  two  factors 
are  to  be  borne  in  mind,  the  assessed  valuation,  and  the  re- 
duction for  cost  of  collection  and  unpaid  taxes.  For  the 
current  fiscal  year  the  state's  assessed  valuation  amounts 
to  $2,532,710,050.  The  estimates  of  the  Comptroller,  based 
upon  the  experience  of  many  years,  is  that  only  80  per  cent 
of  any  tax  levy  reaches  the  state  treasury.  Bearing  these 
two  facts  in  mind  the  rate  that  will  produce  the  average 
of  the  amounts  recommended  for  the  two  years  is  3.4  cents 
on  the  $100  of  assessed  values.  The  gross  yield  of  the  tax 
would  be  $861,121.41.  Deducting  20  per  cent  for  cost  of 
collection  and  unpaid  taxes,  the  net  yield  would  be  $688,- 
897.13.  The  assessed  values  could  not  be  expected  to  in- 
crease sufficiently  to  provide  the  sum  recommended  for  the 
second  year ;  the  values  are  lower  this  year  than  last.  But 


A  Mill  Tax  for  Higher  Educational  Institutions      107 

the  regents  would  have  the  advantage  of  knowing  what  to 
expect  for  that  and  subsequent  years. 

The  following  table,  taken  by  permission,  from  a  bulletin 
of  the  Hogg  Organization,  will  show  that  the  rate  mentioned 
is  low  in  comparison  with  that  of  other  state  universities, 
below  which  the  University  of  Texas  should  not  stand. 

Additional 

Institution  Rate  Appropriations 

by  Legislatures 

California 3  $    301,783.00 

Colorado 8  127,869.00 

Illinois 10 

Michigan 4.75  74,000.00 

Minnesota 2.30  1,060,377.00 

Nebraska 10  110,000.00 

North  Dakota    5.33+  222,817.00 

Wisconsin .- 2.85+  444,135.00 

Average 5.78  334,426.00 

It  will  be  noted  that  the  rates  shown  in  the  tables  have 
proved  too  low  in  the  states, enumerated,  with  the  exception 
of  Illinois.  All  the  other  universities  mentioned  have  had 
to  appeal  biennially  to  the  state  legislatures  for  supplemen- 
tary appropriations,  which  they  have  received  in  the 
amounts  shown  in  the  table.  Such  a  situation  is  unfort- 
unate, and  should  not  be  allowed  to  exist  in  Texas.  The 
removal  of  the  State  University  from  the  scramble  for  ap- 
propriations is  one  of  the  main  purposes  of  a  special  tax, 
and  this  purpose  is  in  large  measure  defeated  in  the  states 
mentioned.  The  mistake  of  these  other  states  should  not 
be  repeated  in  Texas.  It  can  be  avoided  by  means  of  the 
moderate  tax  mentioned.  With  any  rate  lower  than  3.3 
cents,  the  number  of  students  in  attendance  by  1915  will 
require  an  appeal  to  the  Thirty-fourth  Legislature  for  sup- 
plementary appropriations  or  for  an  increase  in  the  tax 
rate.  We  believe  that  the  rate  recommended  is  a  small 
price  to  pay  for  a  permanent  removal  of  the  university  from 
the  domain  of  political  contention. 


108  University  of  Texas  Bulletin 


SIXTEENTH  BIENNIAL  REPORT 

RECOMMENDATIONS  IN  DETAIL  FOR  THE  SESSIONS  OF 
1915-16  AND  1916-17 

Running  Expenses 

Provisions  for  a  sure  and  adequate  annual  income  for 
running  expenses  is  the  most  serious  problem  that  the  au- 
thorities of  a  university  must  face.  Scholarly  teachers, 
books  in  sufficient  numbers,  and  modern  laboratory  equip- 
ment for  a  large  and  growing  educational  institution  cost 
money.  And  this  money  must  be  expended,  particularly 
that  which  is  paid  out  for  salaries,  without  giving  evidence 
of  immediate  tangible  results.  Governors  and  legislatures 
naturally  like  to  leave  evidence  in  brick  and  mortar  of  the 
public  money  they  appropriate.  The  fact  that  appropria- 
tions are  easier  to  secure  for  buildings  than  for  running 
expenses  is  borne  out  by  the  testimony  of  governing  boards 
of  most  state  universities.  The  money  that  goes  for  salaries 
seems  to  disappear,  while  the  buildings  remain  monuments 
to  the  generosity  of  those  who  allow  the  appropriations. 

Of  the  two,  men  to  train  the  minds  of  Texas  boys  and 
girls  or  stately  buildings  in  which  to  house  them,  it  is  ev- 
ident, on  a  moment's  thought,  that  teachers  are  the  first 
essentials.  Classrooms,  so  long  as  they  give  adequate  pro- 
tection from  heat  and  rain  and  cold,  may  be  located  in  pine 
shacks,  without  great  detriment  to  the  substantial  progress 
of  earnest  students.  For  stately  buildings  worthy  of  Texas 
and  its  university,  we  can,  if  it  is  imperative,  wait;  highly 
trained  instructors  in  sufficient  numbers  to  care  for  the 
youths  of  this  state  who  desire  a  university  education,  we 
cannot  do  without.  We  therefore  request,  first,  that  the 
legislature  grant  from  the  general  revenue,  or  by  a  special 
tax  levy,  sufficient  support  to  maintain  properly  a  competent 
faculty,  as  well  as  to  provide  necessary  books,  laboratory 
supplies,  and  incidentals.  We  earnestly  urge  the  legisla- 
ture to  grant  the  sums  asked  for  in  the  budget  recommended, 
which  was  drawn  up  on  a  very  economical  basis. 


A  Mill  Tax  for  Higher  Educational  Institutions      109 

Four  years  have  elapsed  since  the  Main  University  has 
been  permitted  to  use  any  of  its  income  from  lands  or 
other  sources  for  erecting  permanent  buildings.  Since  that 
time  the  attendance  at  the  university  has  been  increased  by 
nearly  one  thousand  students ;  and,  for  absolutely  necessary 
class-rooms,  we  have  been  forced  to  erect  temporary  pine 
shacks  on  the  campus.  About  one-fourth  of  the  work  of 
the  University  is  now  conducted  in  these  cheap  temporary 
structures,  containing  a  floor  space  of  58,774  square  feet. 
These  twelve  buildings  are  designated  and  used  for  the  fol- 
lowing purposes :  A  Hall,  Agriculture  and  Botany ;  C  Hall, 
Chemical  Laboratory;  D  E  Hall,  School  of  Domestic  Econ- 
omy ;  F  Hall,  University  Commons ;  G  Hall,  class-rooms ;  H 
Hall,  Department  of  Education,  School  of  Business  Train- 
ing; I  Hall,  Department  of  Extension;  J  Hall,  School  of 
Journalism,  School  of  Institutional  History;  K  Hall,  class- 
rooms, including  large  lecture  hall ;  L  Hall,  laboratories  for 
Schools  of  Zoology  and  Geology ;  M  Hall,  School  of  Manual 
Training;  N  Hall,  Woman's  Gymnasium. 

Need  of  Maintenance  by  Special  Tax  Levy 

The  amounts  recommended  for  the  biennium  may  be  pro- 
vided either  by  appropriation  from  the  general  revenue,  or 
from  the  proceeds  of  a  special  tax  levy.  We  believe  that  the 
latter  is  the  better  method. 

It  is  generally  agreed  that  the  plan  of  relying  on  appro- 
priations from  the  general  revenue,  made  biennially,  is  open 
to  grave  objections.  A  university,  of  all  institutions,  should 
be  managed  reasonably  and  prudently,  on  the  basis  of  plans 
deliberately  decided  upon,  providing  for  an  orderly  develop- 
ment stretching  over  a  series  of  years.  Such  conduct  of 
affairs  is  impossible  under  the  system  of  biennial  appropria- 
tions. What  will  be  done  by  legislatures  and  governors, 
two,  four,  and  six  years  in  the  future  can  not  possibly  be 
foreseen.  This  situation  compels  the  regents  to  pursue  a 
"hand-to-mouth"  policy,  inconsistent  with  the  interests  of 
the  university,  and  destructive  either  of  prudent  or  of  eco- 
nomical management. 


110  University  of  Texas  Bulletin 

The  entanglement  of  the  university  in  factional  politics 
constitutes,  if  possible,  a  graver  objection-  to  the  system  of 
biennial  appropriations  for  its  maintenance.  The  officers 
of  the  university  should  not  be  called  upon  to  lobby,  however 
important  the  end  to  be  attained  or  unexceptionable  the 
methods  employed.  Men  engaged  in  educational  service 
should  be  free  to  devote  their  best  energies  to  their  high 
functions.  Above  all,  the  university  itself  should  be  so 
supported  as  to  be  wholly  independent  of  partisan  caprice. 

The  plan  of  supporting  the  university  from  the  proceeds 
of  a  special  statutory  tax  has  been  adopted  by  practically 
all  the  strongest  state  universities  of  the  country,  and  we 
recommend  that  the  present  Legislature  employ  this  method 
of  providing  for  the  support  of  the  University  of  Texas. 

In  determining  the  rate  of  such  a  special  tax  two  factors 
are  to  be  borne  in  mind :  the  assessed  valuation  and  the  re- 
duction for  cost  of  collection  and  unpaid  taxes,  ^or  the  cur- 
rent fiscal  year,  the  state's  assessed  valuation  amounts  to 
$2,686,129,989.  The  estimates  of  the  Comptroller,  based 
upon  the  experience  of  many  years,  is  that  only  80  per  cent 
of  any  tax  levy  reaches  the  state  treasury.  These  two  facts 
being  borne  in  mind,  the  rates  that  will  produce  the  amounts 
recommended  for  the  two  years,  respectively,  are  3.33  cents 
and  3.95  cents  on  the  $100  of  assessed  values.  The  gross 
yield  of  the  tax  would  be  $894,481.28  and  $1,061,071.34. 
Twenty  per  cent  for  cost  of  collection  and  unpaid  taxes  being 
deducted,  the  net  yield  would  be  $715,585.03  and  $848,857.02. 

Buildings 

Unless  the  work  of  the  university  is  to  be  very  seriously 
hampered,  the  whole  income  that  can,  under  the  constitution, 
be  expended  for  buildings  must  be  used  for  that  purpose. 
Enlightened  public  opinion  in  Texas  will  not  for  many  years 
allow  the  state's  highest  educational  institution,  the  cap- 
stone of  its  public  school  system,  the  University  of  Texas, 
to  continue  being  housed  in  rough  pine  box  houses.  These 
temporary  houses  should  be  replaced,  at  the  earliest  possible 


A  Mill  Tax  for  Higher  Educational  Institutions      111 

time,  by  permanent  fireproof  buildings,  and  should  be  built 
of  sufficient  size  to  accommodate  a  growing  student  body  for 
at  least  the  next  ten  years.  Probably  the  first  buildings 
that  should  be  erected  for  the  university  are  not  accommoda- 
tions for  education  classrooms  and  laboratories,  as  urgent 
as  the  need  of  them  appears  to  be.  The  most  crying  need 
is  for  the  immediate  erection  of  dormitories  in  which  the 
young  women  of  the  university  may  be  properly  cared  for. 
During  the  session  of  1913-14,  740  young  women  attended 
the  university.  At  least  500  of  these  should  have  been  cared 
for  by  the  institution,  instead  of  being  forced  to  hunt 
throughout  Austin  for  private  houses  that  would  take  them 
as  roomers  and  boarders.  A  scarcely  less  urgent  need  is 
felt  for  suitable  dormitories  for  young  men.  Such  dormi- 
tories should  be  provided  sufficient  to  accommodate  not  less 
than  1500  persons.  The  following  fireprof  buildings  should 
be  erected  as  soon  as  the  Legislature  can  provide  the  neces- 
sary funds : 

Five  dormitories  for  girls,   $50,000  each $  250,000 

Education   and  practice  School , 175,000 

Chemistry  Building  150,000 

Biological  Sciences   Building 150,000 

Domestic   Science   Building 125,000 

Dining  Hall  and  Kitchen 100,00* 

Fifteen  dormitories  for  men,  $50,000  each 750,000 


Total $1,700,000 

Such  an  expenditure  would  exhaust  the  available  univer- 
sity fund  for  the  next  eight  years.  This  fund,  coming  as  it 
does  from  land  leases,  interest  on  land  sales,  interest  on 
bonds,  matriculation  fees,  etc.,  should  be  left  by  the  Legisla- 
ture as  a  sacred  trust  for  the  purpose  of  caring  for  the  build- 
ing needs  of  the  institution.  The  amount  necessary  for 
these  absolutely  pressing  building  needs  should  be  provided 
t>y  bonds  issued  on  the  university's  permanent  income.  Such 
a  provision  is  possible  by  a  simple  act  of  the  Legislature, 
and  the  act  could  be  so  framed  that  the  bonds  would  never 
become  a  charge  on  the  people.  The  sale  of  bonds  offers  one 


112  University  of  Texas  Bulletin 

of  the  fairest  means  of  providing  money  for  buildings,  as  it 
distributes  the  cost  of  the  buildings  more  equitably  over  the 
period  during  which  they  are  used.  It  is  much  fairer  that 
all  the  people  who  enjoy  the  buildings  for  thirty  years  should 
share  in  their  cost,  rather  than  that  their  cost  should  be 
borne  only  by  the  people  living  during  the  one  year  pre- 
ceding their  construction.  Only  by  this  means  can  the  de- 
mand for  permanent  fireproof  buildings  in  the  State  Demo- 
cratic platform  be  satisfied,  so  far  as  the  university  is  con- 
cerned. 

Other  buildings  are  necessary  to  have  a  "university  of  the 
first  class,"  and  should  be  provided  as  early  as  possible,, 
namely:  a  medical  laboratory  building,  physics  building, 
gymnasium  building,  museum  of  Texas  history  and  products, 
museum  of  natural  sciences,  administration  building,  engi- 
neering building,  and  a  building  for  fine  arts.  The  urgent 
need  of  these  buildings  must  be  apparent  to  anyone  who  will 
visit  our  campus  and  consider  thoughtfully  the  difficulties 
under  which  we  are  laboring. 

On  more  than  one  occasion  state  Democratic  platforms 
have  recommended  the  removal  of  the  inhibition  existing 
against  the  university  only,  among  all  the  state  institutions, 
prohibiting  making  appropriations  out  of  the  general  rev- 
enue for  the  erection  of  buildings.  Under  the  present  con- 
stitution, if  the  university  is  swept  by  a  fire  while  without 
the  protection  of  adequate  insurance,  the  situation  would  be 
appalling.  The  men  who  framed  the  present  constitution 
could  not  possibly  foresee  the  necessities  of  a  large  and 
growing  university;  and  it  certainly  was  never  the  inten- 
tion of  the  founders  so  to  limit  the  income  of  the  university, 
originally  most  generously  provided,  or  that  there  would 
ever  be  serious  danger  of  its  work  being  stopped.  Under 
the  present  condition,  such  danger  exists,  and  we  should 
cease  blinding  ourselves  to  the  situation.  Either  the  state 
university  of  one  of  the  largest  commonwealths  in  the  Union 
must  continue  its  existence,  housed  in  utterly  unsuitable 
buildings,  in  imminent  danger  of  being  stopped  altogether 
by  fire,  or  the  Legislature  and  the  people  must  remove  from 


A  Mill  Tax  for  Higher  Educational  Institutions       113 

the  constitution  the  bar  to  our  progress.  If  this  were  done 
and  an  adequate  special  tax  voted,  then  the  university  would 
be  free  from  the  situation  that  stifles  its  growth,  impedes 
its  progress,  and  absorbs  the  energy  of  the  men  who  have 
been  appointed  to  guide  its  destinies  educationally  rather 
than  to  be  solicitors  of  funds  for  its  daily  existence. 

How  inadequately  the  University  of  Texas  is  supplied 
with  buildings,  both  in  Austin  and  in  Galveston,  appears 
from  the  following  table,  which  is  based  upon  the  same  data 
as  the  preceding  ones.  The  table  gives  the  present  invest- 
ment, by  the  states  mentioned,  in  plants  for  their  higher 
educational  institutions. 


TABLE  V.— VALUE  OF  PLANT* 


California    .  . . 
Minnesota    . . . 

Iowa    , 

Michigan 

Ohio 

Wisconsin    . . . 

Illinois    

Colorado    , 

Kansas 

Missouri    

Indiana    

Nebraska    . . . 
North  Dakota 

Average 

Texas . . 


—  $9,865,000 

8,531,000 

. 7,355,000 

6,885,000 
6,714,000 
6,444,000 
3,896,000 

. 3,560,000 

.—  3,412,000 

2,880,000 
2,399,000 
2,289,000 
.—  1,626,000 

, 5,066,000 

1,644,000 

The  amount  credited  to  Texas  represents  the  university's 
investments  in  buildings,  a  disproportionately  small  amount, 
considering  the  institution's  relatively  large  student  body — 
according  to  the  best  estimates,  more  than  2400  for  the 
current  regular  session,  and  from  4000  to  4500  if  summer 
school  and  correspondence  students  are  included 

The  inadequacy  of  the  university's  buildings  and  campus 
may  also  be  judged  by  the  following  table,  which  gives  the 
value  of  the  plants  of  a  number  of  universities,  divided  by 
the  number  of  students  in  the  regular  session,  f  or  the  year 
1913: 


114  University  of  Texas  Bulletin 

TABLE  VI. — VALUE  OF  PLANT  PER  STUDENT  IN  LONG  SESSION 

Minnesota    $2,305 

California    —  1,833 

North  Dakota    —  1,760 

Wisconsin    1,521 

Ohio    —  1,316 

Iowa    1,279 

Colorado    1,210 

Missouri    1,132 

Michigan    1,069 

Kansas    903 

Illinois    —  831 

Nebraska  690 

Indiana  669 

Average .  1,257 

TEXASf 695 

*For  University  and  A.  and  M.  College  combined. 
tFor  University  of  Texas  only. 

EIGHTEENTH  BIENNIAL  REPORT 

It  is  humanly  impossible  to  forecast  for  two  years,  or 
even  one,  many  hundred  items  of  expenditure,  especially 
when  a  majority  of  those  items  are  concerned  with  the  sal- 
aries of  the  members  of  a  staff  that  is  continually  shifting 
and  changing.  Under  the  circumstances,  substitutions  and 
changes  in  the  individual  appropriations  are  absolutely  nec- 
essary. Positions  and  salaries  are  fixed  with  reference  to 
the  attainments  and  abilities  of  the  individuals,  and  must 
vary  accordingly.  Only  in  exceptional  cases  is  the  univer- 
sity able  to  fill  a  vacancy  through  the  appointment  of  a  man 
whose  training  and  achievements  warrant  precisely  the 
same  rank  and  salary  as  those  of  his  predecessor. 

Lack  of  elasticity  in  the  appropriation  for  the  current 
biennium  has  forced  the  Board  to  expend  for  operating  ex- 
penses approximately  $100,000.00  out  of  the  available  fund, 
that  might  otherwise  have  been  saved  for  permanent  im- 
provements. The  difficulties  of  administration  which  have 
been  experienced  during  this  biennium  have,  of  course,  been 
somewhat  abnormal ;  yet,  at  the  same  time,  the  probabilities 


A  Mill  Tax  for  Higher  Educational  Institutions      115 

are  that,  as  soon  as  settled  conditions  once  more  obtain 
throughout  the  country,  the  stimulus  to  education  which  has 
been  given  by  the  policies  of  the  War  Department  will  great- 
ly increase  the  attendance  at  the  University,  and  make  the 
administrative  problems  of  the  next  biennium  more  difficult 
than  any  we  have  yet  experienced. 

The  matter  of  conserving  the  available  fund  of  the  uni- 
versity for  permanent  improvemnts  is  one  of  prime  im- 
portance at  the  present  time.  Definite  steps  must  be  taken 
in  the  near  future  looking  toward  the  provision  of  an  ade- 
quate physical  plant  for  the  institution.  Fully  one-fourth 
of  the  work  of  the  University  is  now  being  conducted  in 
temporary  pine  shacks.  The  Main  Building,  in  which  a 
majority  of  the  classes  are  held,  is  daily  occupied  at  a  risk 
of  life  to  the  students  that  can  not  be  exaggerated.  The 
university  auditorium  has  been  condemned  by  the  State 
Fire  Marshal,  and  has  been  closed  for  the  past  two  years. 
Unless  the  work  of  the  University  is  to  be  seriously  ham- 
pered, stately  fireproof  buildings  worthy  of  Texas  and  of  its 
university  must  soon  be  provided.  The  urgent  need  of  such 
permanent  buildings  must  be  apparent  to  any  one  who  visits 
the  campus  and  thoughtfully  considers  the  difficulties  under 
which  the  institution  is  laboring. 

The  board  has  carefully  canvassed  the  needs  of  the  uni- 
versity for  additional  buildings  and  grounds,  and  has 
reached  the  conclusion  that,  for  the  proper  conduct  of  the 
institution,  upon  the  basis  of  the  present  attendance  in  Aus- 
tin and  in  Galveston,  the  expenditure  of  at  least  $5,000,- 
000.00  is  necessary  to  provide  an  adequate  physical  plant. 
There  is  perhaps  no  other  institution  in  the  United  States 
that  is  undertaking  to  do  the  amount  of  work  that  is  being 
done  by  the  University  with  an  equipment  so  far  below  its 
actual  needs.  The  effect  of  this  inadequate  equipment  is 
two-fold :  (1)  It  seriously  hampers  both  students  and  facul- 
ty in  the  spirit  with  which  their  work  is  done;  (2)  it  re- 
tards the  growth  of  the  University  in  point  of  numbers. 
Annually  the  State  of  Texas  sends  to  universities  and  col- 
leges of  other  states  more  than  3,000  young  men  and  women, 
many  of  whom  would  be  attracted  to  the  University  of  Texas 


116  University  of  Texas  Bulletin 

if  an  adequate  plant  were  provided.  Numbers  of  individual 
instances  have  been  brought  to  the  attention  of  the  Board 
where  parents,  for  reasons  of  sentiment,  advantageous  as- 
sociation, or  state  pride,  have  desired  to  send  their  sons  and 
daughters  to  the  University,  but  have  hesitated  to  do  so  on 
account  of  the  lack  of  proper  facilities  here,  particularly  in 
the  way  of  adequate  residential  quarters.  The  Board  be- 
lieves that  with  the  expenditure  before  indicated,  running 
over  a  brief  course  of  years,  the  disadvantages  under  which 
the  university  now  labors  will  be  largely  eliminated. 

The  inserted  table,  based  upon  figures  contained  in  the 
United  States  Bureau  of  Education  Bulletin  1917,  No.  55, 
Statistics  of  State  Universities  and  State  Colleges,  and  in 
the  United  States  Bureau  of  the  Census  bulletins  Estimates 
of  Population  of  the  United  States,  1910-1916,  and  estimated 
Valuation  of  National  Wealth,  1850-1912,  will  reveal  the 
relative  economy  with  which  the  University  of  Texas  is  be- 
ing conducted.  In  comparison  with  other  states,  Texas 
spends  very  little  for  higher  education,  either  per  inhabi- 
tant, per  unit  of  wealth,  or  per  long-session  student.  The 
table  also  shows  that  the  number  of  students  per  teacher  is 
too  great  for  efficiency,  and  must  be  lowered  if  the  boys  and 
girls  attending  our  state  institutions  of  higher  learning  are 
to  receive  the  advantages  enjoyed  by  the  no  more  worthy 
boys  and  girls  of  other  states.  How  inadequately  the  Uni- 
versity of  Texas  is  supplied  with  buildings  in  indicated  by 
a  comparison  of  the  value  of  other  state  university  plants 
with  that  of  our  own. 

EXTRACTS  FROM  THE  REPORT  OF  THE  CENTRAL 
INVESTIGATING  COMMITTEE  OF  THE  THIRTY- 
FIFTH  LEGISLATURE 

UNIVERSITY  OF  TEXAS 
Physical  Plant 

The  physical  plant  of  the  University  of  Texas  consists 
of  forty  acres  of  land  in  the  city  of  Austin,  valued  at 


A  Mill  Tax  for  Higher  Educational  Institutions      117 

$500,000 ;  and  nine  brick  buildings  from  one  to  five  stories 
in  height  and  twelve  temporary  frame  buildings,  all  of 
which  are  inventoried  at  $1,319,901.79,  and  to  which  inven- 
tory is  to  be  added  a  balance  of  $77,908.85  on  the  new  Edu- 
cation Building  estimated  to  cost  $250,000,  practically  all 
of  which  cost  has  been  paid ;  and  which  inventory  of  build- 
ings includes  an  equity  in  the  remodeling  of  the  Old  Blind 
Institute,  now  being  used  for  the  School  of  Military  Aero- 
nautics. 

Auditorium 

The  auditorium  on  the  third  floor  in  the  Main  Building 
has  been  condemned  by  the  State  Fire  Marshal  as  unsafe 
for  use.  It  has  a  seating  capacity  of  about  1750.  For  more 
than  a  year  the  room  has  been  closed  and  is  of  no  value  to 
the  university.  The  fire  marshal  questions  the  advisability 
of  endeavoring  to  use  the  auritorium  through  the  construc- 
tion of  fire  escapes  leading  from  each  qf  the  windows  to  the 
ground. 

Shacks 

The  so-called  "shacks,"  of  one-story  frame  construction 
for  class  work  a.re  really  serviceable  beyond  expectation, 
and  while  it  is  regrettable  that  the  highest  educational  in- 
stitution in  the  state  should  find  it  necessary  to  employ  such 
structures,  it  seems  likely  they  will  serve  a  valuable  purpose, 
in  addition  to  the  accommodation  provided,  in  making  pos- 
sible practical  studies  in  the  better  arrangement  of  perma- 
nent buildings,  particularly  with  reference  to  laboratory 
work. 

Policy  of  Administration 

The  views  of  institutional  needs  entertained  by  the  ad- 
ministrative head  and  the  governing  body,  naturally  will 
differ  from  the  views  of  the  legislative  body,  resulting,  as  in 


118  University  of  Texas  Bulletin 

the  University  of  Texas,  in  there  being  a  legislative  budget 
setting  out  in  detail  the  items  of  maintenance,  and  a  budget 
of  the  board  of  regents  covering  like  items  as  well  as  other 
items  for  expansion  not  provided  for  in  the  legislative  appro- 
priations, and  upon  the  policy  of  which  the  Legislature  may 
or  may  not  have  expressed  itself.  The  possession  of  inde- 
pendent or  available  funds,  it  will  thus  be  seen,  represents 
a  constant  opportunity  and  incentive  to  institutional  ex- 
pansion, carrying  the  activities  and  expenditures  of  the  in- 
stitution beyond  the  limit  of  legislative  sanction,  and  not 
infrequently  beyond  popular  needs  and  public  approval. 
The  freedom  with  which  the  university  has  exercised  its 
ability  to  extend  the  scope  of  its  efforts  and  increase  its  ex- 
penses has  brought  upon  it  more  or  less  of  criticism. 

The  need  would  seem  to  be  for  a  clearer  conception  by 
the  university  administration,  and  a  clearer  expression  by 
the  people  of  the  state,  of  the  scope  of  educational  work 
legitimately  to  devolve  upon  this  institution  and  the  meas- 
ure of  responsiveness  of  such  work  to  the  popular  need,  to 
the  end  that  it  may  fulfill  the  purpose  for  which  created, 
that  of  developing  a  university  of  the  first  class.  Such  ac- 
tivities and  policy  having  once  been  clearly  defined  there 
would  seem  to  be  comparatively  little  reason  or  opportunity 
for  criticizing  the  expenditures  of  the  university,  made  in 
the  carefully  directed  effort  to  effectuate  this  controlling 
purpose. 

In  this  connection,  the  committee  feels  justified  in  direct- 
ing attention  to  the  fact  that  had  the  Legislature,  recog- 
nizing the  limitation  on  appropriations  from  the  general 
revenues  for  university  buildings,  inaugurated  the  policy 
of  appropriating  the  income  from  the  permanent  university 
endowment,  as  the  constitution  permits,  for  the  specific  and 
only  purpose  of  constituting  a  fund  from  which  to  con- 
struct permanent  buildings,  the  university  might  now  pos- 
sess a  building  equipment  of  considerable  value.  The  con- 
stitution expressly  provides  that  the  income  from  the  per- 
manent endowment  shall  be  subject  to  appropriation  by  the 


A  Mill  Tax  for  Higher  Educational  Institutions      119 

Legislature  for  the  purposes  of  establishing  as  well  as  sup- 
porting the  university.  The  Legislature  must  bear  its  part 
of  the  responsibility  for  the  lack  of  building  equipment  at 
the  university,  for  which  it  was  possible  to  provide.  The 
university  management,  however,  must  likewise  bear  its 
share  of  the  responsibility  for  failing  to  outline  and  ad- 
vance such  a  building  program,  and  for  not  making  it  pos- 
sible to  carry  out  such  a  program  by  the  exercise  of  rigid 
economy  in  expenditures  for  maintenance  purposes,  instead 
of  being  led  into  the  policy  of  supplementing  legislative  ap- 
propriations from  the  general  revenue  for  maintenance  pur- 
poses by  moneys  taken  from  its  available  income. 

The  committee  finds  that  the  policy  permitted  in  some  in- 
stitutions, and  to  some  extent  permitted  heretofore  in  the 
University  of  Texas,  of  granting  leave  of  absence  to  mem- 
bers of  the  faculty  for  varying  periods  of  time  on  full  pay, 
or  part  pay,  has  been  discontinued,  and  no  member  of  the 
faculty  has  been  granted  leave  under  such  conditions  since 
the  beginning  of  the  present  school  year.  The  practice, 
also,  which  caused  some  criticism  of  permitting  members 
of  the  university  faculty,  when  delivering  lectures  and  ad- 
dresses to  clubs,  organizations,  schools,  or  teachers'  insti- 
tutes, accepting  special  compensation,  has  been  discontin- 
ued, and  no  one  is  now  supposed  to  accept  such  benefits. 
The  committee  is  confident  from  assurances  of  the  univer- 
sity administration  that  such  policies  will  not  be  resumed. 

Retirement  on  Reduced  Salary 

The  committee  in  its  study  of  conditions  calculated  to 
inure  to  the  advantage  of  the  university  has  been  led  to 
inquire  into  the  advisability  of  some  plan  looking  to  the 
retirement  of  members  of  the  faculty  on  reduced  salaries 
after  they  have  given  to  the  institution  many  years  of  faith- 
ful service  and  have  reached  that  age  at  which  the  capacity 
to  serve  the  institution  has  been  appreciably  diminished. 
It  is  unquestionable  that  the  establishment  of  such  policy 
would  be  calculated  to  increase  loyalty,  create  a  feeling  of 
security,  lessen  the  loss  of  the  service  of  capable  men,  and 


120  University  of  Texas  Bulletin 

tend  materially  to  strengthen  the  interest  in  and  perma- 
nency of  faculty  organization.  Every  great  institution 
must  solve  this  problem  at  some  time,  and  the  committee 
believes  that  the  time  has  come  in  the  history  of  the  Univer- 
sity of  Texas  when  the  board  of  regents  should  seriously 
give  consideration  to  such  a  policy.  A  discussion  of  the  de- 
tails of  plans  calculated  to  accomplish  the  purpose  would 
seem  scarcely  within  the  province  of  this  inquiry,  the  com- 
mittee contenting  itself  with  commending  the  question  to 
the  board  of  regents  and  to  the  Legislature. 

*  Building  Requirements 

The  administrative  authorities  of  the  Agricultural  and 
Mechanical  College  have  outlined  their  estimate  of  the  needs 
of  that  institution  for  buildings  covering  the  next  ten  years, 
and  places  such  estimate  for  that  period  at  approximately 
$2,500,000,  and  this,  too,  in  the  expectancy  of  the  State 
adopting  the  policy  of  junior  agricultural  schools  teaching 
agriculture  and  animal  husbandry,  which  will  in  some 
measure  restrict  the  ratio  of  increased  attendance  at  the 
College.  To  this  sum  must  be  added  an  estimate  for  the 
decennium  of  approximately  $500,000  to  $750,000,  for  per- 
manent improvements  at  the  Prairie  View  Normal  and  In- 
dustrial College  for  colored  youths. 

The  committee  does  not  believe  this  estimate  at  all  ex- 
cessive; and  further  believes  the  general  policy  pursued 
heretofore  of  erecting  buildings  especially  designed  for  de- 
partmental service,  preferable  to  the  construction  of  fewer 
and  larger  structures  intended  to  accommodate  unrelated 
departments  is  calculated  to  secure  more  advantageous  re- 
sults. 

In  the  State  Agricultural  and  Mechanical  College,  Texas 
may  justly  claim  possession  of  one  of  the  most  progressive 
colleges  devoted  to  vocational  instruction  in  the  Union.  It 
is  neither  as  large,  nor  is  its  equipment  as  good,  as  a  num- 
ber of  similar  institutions  in  other  states,  but  the  spirit  and 


A  Mill  Tax  for  Higher  Educational  Institutions      121 

policy,  it  may  be  confidently  asserted,  are  second  to  no  col- 
lege in  thd  country  covering  the  same  field. 

(Signed)     LEONARD  TILLOTSON, 

Chairman. 
OSCAR  DAVIS, 
House  Subcommittee.  No.  9. 

I.  E.  CLARK, 
Chairman,  Senate  Subcommittee  No.  9. 

COLLEGE  OF  INDUSTRIAL  ARTS 
Inadequate  Dormitory  Facilities 

We  found  in  course  of  construction  two  fine  dormitories, 
but  these  will  still  fall  short  of  caring  for  the  student  body 
by  at  least  three  hundred.  At  present,  six  hundred  girls 
are  cared  for  outside  the  dormitories,  and  while  the  school 
and  city  authorities  co-operate  in  every  way,  and  the 
splendid  citizenship  of  Denton  help  all  they  can,  this  con- 
dition ought  to  be  remedied  as  soon  as  the  public  purse  will 
permit. 

The  average  cost  per  student  to  the  State  is  lessening, 
having  come  from  $1.16  per  capita  per  day  in  1913  to  97.76 
cents  per  day  in  1916-17. 

There  was  but  one  salary  increase  for  teachers  for  the 
year  1917-18.  A  teacher  who  had  been  absent  studying  for 
a  year  at  her  own  expense,  was  allowed  a  raise  of  $200  per 
year  upon  her  return,  her  present  salary  being  $1,600. 

The  school  had  186  pupils  its  first  year,  1903-04.  This 
year  it  has  about  1,250.  Then  it  had  one  small  administra- 
tion building ;  now  it  has  two  splendid  building  for  instruc- 
tion, and  with  the  two  now  being  built,  four  large  dormi- 
tories, besides  other  buildings  for  laundry,  dairy,  poultry, 
photography,  hospital,  etc. 

Salaries  Too  Low 

Your  committee  believes  the  salaries  of  the  teachers  too 
low,  and  states  that  we  lost  to  other  schools  last  year  ten 


122  University  of  Texas  Bulletin 

trained  teachers  we  could  ill  afford  to  lose;  but  they  were 
offered  more  pay  than  we  gave  them  or  could  give  them 
under  our  appropriation.  Twelve  teachers  get  less  than 
$1,200  per  year,  and  only  one  gets  more  than  $2,000  per 
year.  Your  committee  strenuously  opposes  extravagance, 
but  affirms  that  the  best  teachers  in  the  world  in  their  special 
lines  are  not  too  good  for  Texas  girls.  It  is  worth  while  to 
pay  a  good  salary  to  a  teacher  who  can  so  teach  a  graduat- 
ing class  that  every  girl  can  make  her  own  graduating 
dress,  beautiful  dresses,  too,  and  make  it  so  that  its  total 
cost  is  less  than  $5.00.  It  is  worth  while  to  pay  a  teacher 
who  can  teach  a  girl  to  cook  so  that  her  husband  goes  to  his 
work  fit  for  it,  and  her  children  can  grow  up  fit  physical 
citizens  of  Texas.  A  remarkable  showing  of  a  school,  not 
one  of  whose  graduates  has  been  a  party  to  a  divorce  suit, 
or  has  brought  into  the  world  a  defective  child. 

Respectfully  submitted, 

(Signed)      R.  F.  Spencer. 
Chairman,  Subcommittee  No.  1. 
0.  S.  LATTIMORE, 

Chairman,  Senate  Subcommittee  No.  1. 

Educational  Council  Recommended 

In  order  that  the  work  and  development  of  each  institution 
may  be  directed  along  the  lines  assigned  by  law  and  to  avoid 
the  possibility  of  needless  duplication,  and  expenditure,  and 
friction,  the  Committee  would  suggest  the  creation  by 
statute  of  an  educational  council  to  be  composed  of  one  mem- 
ber of  each  of  the  governing  boards  and  one  member  of 
each  of  the  faculties,  both  to  be  appointed  by  the  president 
of  each  board,  of  the  University  of  Texas,  the  Agricultural 
and  Mechanical  College  of  Texas,  the  College  of  Industrial 
Arts,  and  the  State  Normal  Schools,  together  with  the  State 
Superintendent  of  Public  Instruction,  nine  in  number.  The 
specific  duties  of  such  a  council  to  be: 

(a)  To  consider  all  questions  relating  to  possible  du- 
plication of  educational  work,  both  in  extension  work  and 
the  major  lines  of  instruction  of  the  institutions;  and 


A  Mill  Tax  for  Higher  Educational  Institutions      123 

(b)  To  perform  the  general  duties  of  a  budget  commit- 
tee in  the  consideration,  adjustment  and  recommendation 
to  the  legislature  of  the  needs  of  the  several  institutions. 
No  system  of  state  education,  and  no  state  policy  for  the 
advancement  of  education,  either  in  the  common  schools  or 
in  the  colleges  and  the  university,  is  possible  of  the  most 
useful  development  unless  it  recognizes  every  institution  as 
a  necessary  and  integral  part  of  the  one  indivisible  whole, 
and  provides  for  intelligent  co-operation.  The  policy  here- 
tofore-permitted  of  leaving  each  institution  to  besiege  suc- 
cessive legislatures  with  separate  demands  based  upon  in- 
dependent plans  of  expansion,  and  conceived  in  absolute  ig- 
norance of  the  popular  need,  as  expressed  in  the  growth 
and  demands  upon  the  educational  service  of  other  institu- 
tions, is  as  wasteful  in  the  useless  expenditure  of  public 
funds  and  misdirected  effort,  certain  to  lead  to  the  identifica- 
tion of  the  educational  institutions  of  the  state  with  political 
activities,  as  it  is  inexcusable  in  an  intelligent  and  public 
spirited  citizenship  to  tolerate  such  a  system. 

With  the  adoption  of  the  proposed  constitutional  amend- 
ment and  the  authorization  by  the  legislature  of  a  tax  levy 
to  be  equitably  allotted  by  statute  among  the  institutions 
named;  and  with  statutory  authorization  for  the  employ- 
ment of  the  permanent  endowment  of  each  institution  as 
the  basis  for  a  fund  with  which  to  provide  permanent 
buildings,  such  a  central  council  would  be  relieved  of  much 
of  the  responsibility  for  consideration  of  the  financial  re- 
quirement of  the  institutions,  inasmuch  as  the  provisions  in- 
dicated would  allow  for  a  building  program  and  for  a  min- 
imum maintenance  income  for  each  class  of  institutions. 
The  danger,  however,  would  be  that  without  some  controll- 
ing agency  which  would  co-ordinate  the  growing  needs  of 
the  institutions,  there  might  develop  the  same  incentive  as 
heretofore  for  the  different  institutions  to  appeal  to  the 
legislature  for  appropriations  supplementing  the  allotted 
income  from  the  tax  levy.  By  submitting  the  needs  of  each 
institution,  in  excess  of,  the  tax  levy,  to  such  a  council,  act- 
ing as  a  budget  committee,  would  effectively  prevent  the  re- 
currence of  the  condition  which  it  is  now  sought  to  overcome 


124  University  of  Texas  Bulletin 

through  the  adoption  of  this  amendment  and  the  authoriza- 
tion of  a  tax  levy  for  maintenance  purposes,  and  would  har- 
monize the  work  of  the  different  institutions  in  their  respec- 
tive fields  of  educational  activity.  Without  some  such 
agency  as  will  be  provided  through  this  council,  there  would 
be  constant  danger  of  each  successive  legislature  readjust- 
ing the  allotment  under  the  tax  levy  and  thus  disturbing  the 
harmonious  relationship  of  the  various  institutions.  It 
might  be  that  a  limitation  on  the  time  in  which  such  change 
in  the  division  of  the  amount  of  the  tax  levy  should  be  made 
would  best  be  incoporated  in  the  constitution,  but  the  com- 
mittee does  not  feel  this  to  be  the  better  policy,  preferring 
the  more  elastic  plan  of  leaving  not  only  the  authorization 
of  the  tax  levy,  but  the  division  of  its  proceeds  and  the  care 
of  all  additional  needs  to  the  legislature.  The  members  of 
such  a  council  might  confidently  be  relied  upon  to  make 
such  an  equitable  recommendation  for  such  funds  as  would 
be  required  to  meet  the  needs  of  the  different  institutions 
from  year  to  year  in  excess  of  the  allotment  under  the  tax 
levy.  In  this  way  a  building  program  would  be  provided 
for  the  University  and  the  Agricultural  and  Mechanical  Col- 
lege, and  maintenance  would  be  provided  for  the  university 
and  branches,  the  Agricultural  and  Mechanical  College  and 
branches,  the  College  of  Industrial  Arts,  the  Normal  Schools, 
and  the  Prairie  View  Normal,  and  all  these  institutions  will 
be  kept  constantly  in  harmonious  relationship,  each  supple- 
menting in  its  sphere  of  activity  the  work  of  the  others, 
preventing  unnecessary  duplication  in  educational  work, 
and  preventing  the  unnecessary  expenditure  of  funds  in  the 
undue  expansion  of  either  of  the  institutions  comprising  a 
part  of  the  system  of  higher  education  of  the  state. 

Future  of  the  University  and  of  its  Constitutional 
Branches 

Under  legislative  interpretation  and  the  policy  hereto- 
fore adhered  to,  it  is  too  apparent  for  discussion  that  the 
present  constitutional  provisions  controlling  the  university 
and  its  branches  are  hampering  the  development  of  both  the 


A  Mill  Tax  for  Higher  Educational  Institutions      125 

University  and  the  Agricultural  and  Mechanical  College  in 
a  degree  that  should  not  be  permitted  to  continue  longer 
than  is  necessary  to  amend  the  constitution.  While  legis- 
lative policy  has  construed  the  constitutional  limitation  on 
appropriations  from  the  public  revenues  as  restricted  to 
the  prohibition  against  provision  for  permanent  buildings 
at  the  University  in  Austin,  it,  can  be  considered  little 
more  than  a  legal  fiction  that  permits  appropriations  for 
the  Agricultural  and  Mechanical  College,  the  Prairie  View 
Normal,  and  other  constitutional  branches  of  the  Univer- 
sity. Not  alone  adequate,  but  intelligently  controlled  and 
utilized,  financial  provision  is  essential  to  the  development 
and  maintenance  of  any  educational  institution.  The  per- 
manent university  endowment  must  be  construed  as  be- 
longing in  part  to  those  institutions  constitutionally  de- 
clared to  be  a  part  of  that  institution,  and  this  fund  will 
never,  under  conditions  of  public  sentiment  respecting  the 
independent  status  and  organization  of  the  University  and 
the  Agricultural  and  Mechanical  College,  be  utilized  in  ac- 
cordance with  a  commendable  business  policy,  nor  will  it 
be  possible  for  it  to  contribute  in  a  material  way  to  the 
advantage  of  the  institutions  considered  until  the  equity  of 
each  has  been  made  available  for  separate  control  and  use 
and  it  is  readily  apparent  that,  until  such  action  is  taken, 
there  must  be  a  spirit  of  apprehensive  solicitousness  among 
the  partial  friends  of  each  institution  interested  concerning 
each  act  and  policy  of  the  main  institution  in  the  control 
and  individual  utilization  of  the  benefits  of  the  fund,  cal- 
culated to  create  discord  where  co-operation  is  demanded 
by  every  requirement  of  service  to  the  public.  In  justice  to 
itself  and  the  position  of  popular  esteem  it  must  establish 
and  maintain  to  fulfill  its  mission  of  public  usefulness,  the 
University  should  be  freed  from  all  suspicion  that  any  in- 
fluence connected  or  identified  with  its  direction  is  opposed 
to  the  early  and  satisfactory  settlement  of  the  question  in- 
volved in  the  interest  of  its  branches  in  the  permanent 
university  endowment.  Admitting  without  discussion,  that 
the  policy  of  the  state  in  creating  institutions  independent 


126  University  of  Texas  Bulletin 

in  administrative  organization  and  charged  with  distinct 
educational  activities,  rendering  them  independent  centers 
of  popular  favor,  may  not  have  been  the  wiser  plan  from  the 
standpoint  of  an  ideal  system  of  higher  education  in  which 
the  university  should  be  the  one  head  and  all  other  educa- 
tional provisions  by  the  state  parts  of  an  intelligently  ar- 
ticulated whole,  the  situation  confronting  us  now  is  that  the 
state  has,  through  its  establishment  of  different  classes  of 
institutions,  such  as  the  Agricultural  and  Mechanical  Col- 
lege, the  College  of  Industrial  Arts,  and  the  system  of  state 
normal  schools,  committed  itself  to  the  policy  of  separate 
identity  and  direction  of  the  institutions  created  to  perform 
these  different  educational  functions.  Our  task,  therefore, 
is  plain.  We  must  take  these  more  or  less  loosely  organized 
institutions,  free  them  from  such  limitations  under  the 
organic  law  as  prevent  development  of  an  intelligent  policy 
for  educational  progress,  and  correlate  them  in  as  harmo- 
nious a  system  as  it  may  be  possible  to  establish,  capable 
of  rendering  the  maximum  of  service  to  the  people.  This, 
in  the  judgment  of  the  committee,  can  only  be  accomplished 
through  a  change  in  the  constitution,  and  in  this  view  we 
recommend  the  submission  to  the  people  by  the  rext  regular 
session  of  the  Legislature  of  the  accompanying  proposed 
amendment  to  the  constitution. 

In  brief,  this  proposed  constitutional  amendment  would 
contain  the  following  specific  provisions: 

(1)  The  constitutional  identity  and  location  of  each  of 
the  following  institutions,  namely,  the  University,  the  Med- 
ical College,  and  the  School  of  Mines  as  branches  of  that  in- 
stitution ;  and  the  Agricultural  and  Mechanical  College,  the 
College  of  Industrial  Arts,  and  the  Prairie  View  Normal 
and  Industrial  College. 

(2)  The  general  character  of  educational  work  of  each 
institution. 

(3)  For  the  separation  of  the  Agricultural  and  Mechan- 
ical College  and  the  Prairie  View  Normal  as  branches  of  the 
University  of  Texas;  and  for  the  sale  of  the  university 
lands  and  division  of  the  permanent  university  endowment, 


A  Mill  Tax  for  Higher  Educational  Institutions      127 

two-thirds  to  the  University  and  one-third  to  the  Agricul- 
tural and  Mechanical  College,  from  which  one-Vhird  of  the 
claims  of  the  Prairie  View  Normal  shall  be  cared  for  as 
may  be  provided  by  law. 

(4)  That  the  respective  parts  of  the  permanent  endow- 
ment allotted  to  each  institution  become  the  permanent  fund 
of  each,  to  be  invested  as  authorized  by  law  in  bonds  having 
the  taxing  power  for  their  security  and  redemption. 

The  committee  indulges  the  belief  that  the  adoption  of 
such  an  amendment  to  the  constitution,  supplemented  by 
judicious  statutory  enactment,  would  give  to  Texas  some- 
thing in  the  nature  of  a  definite,  as  well  as  comprehensive, 
state  educational  policy,  reasonably  correlated  and  coordi- 
nated to  meet  the  requirements  of  higher  education  and  vo- 
cational training. 

Disadvantages  in  Handling  Land  Endoiument 

The  endowment  of  the  University,  splendid  as  it  is  in  its 
possibilities  for  the  development  of  the  institution  and  its 
branches,  is  yet,  under  the  constitution,  of  comparatively 
small  practical  value  as  an  asset  in  the  proper  equipment 
and  development  of  the  university.  While  it  is  probable 
that  a  policy  rigidly  adhered  to  by  the  board  of  regents,  set- 
ting aside  the  available  fund  represented  in  the  income  from 
the  permanent  endowment  would  have  resulted  by  this  time 
in  the  construction  of  a  considerable  number  of  modern 
buildings  answering  the  requirements  of  the  institution, 
such  policy  has  not  been  uniformly  observed;  and  in  view 
of  the  normal  growth  and  general  conditions  which  have 
prevailed  and  are  likely  to  continue  to  prevail  in  the  ad- 
vancement of  the  institution,  this  income  may  not  be  relied 
upon  to  provide  even  in  reasonable  part  for  the  building 
needs  of  the  Main  University,  to  say  nothing  of  the  claims 
of  its  constitutional  branches.  This  endowment,  consisting 
mainly  of  2,079,520  acres  of  land,  now  yields,  under  the 
control  of  the  board  of  regents,  through  its  state  land  agent, 
an  annual  income  estimated,  on  the  basis  of  existing  leases, 


128  University  of  Texas  Bulletin 

to  be  for  the  year  1918,  $195,360.88.  All  of  this  revenue  is 
used  by  the  Main  University,  none  of  it  going  to  the  other 
constitutional  branches  of  the  institution. 

Proceeds  from  Sale  of  Lands  Needed  for  Building  Purposes 

The  constitutional  limitation  strictly  construed  in  the 
legislative  policy  of  the  state  to  prohibit  appropriations  for 
the  construction  of  permanent  buildings  at  the  Main  Uni- 
versity, while  sanctioning  more  or  less  liberal  provisions  for 
appropriations  for  the  constitutional  branches  of  the  Uni- 
versity, creates  a  condition  which  may  not  be  much  longer 
permitted,  if  the  public  expectation  of  the  usefulness  of  the 
institution  is  to  be  met.  The  popular  sentiment  is,  that, 
with  an  endowment  of  the  proportions  of  that  possessed  by 
the  University,  some  practicable  policy  should  be  established 
by  which  this  endowment  may  be  utilized  as  the  basis  for 
securing  the  construction  of  necessary  permanent  buildings 
and  permanent  improvements  not  only  of  the  Main  Univer- 
sity but  of  its  constitutional  branches,  relieving  the  state 
to  some  extent  at  least  of  the  necessity  of  making  provi- 
sions for  such  improvements  by  appropriations  from  the 
general  revenues  of  the  state. 

Salaries 

The  salaries  of  the  faculty  of  the  Agricultural  and  Me- 
chanical College  are  comparatively  low,  the  average  salary 
for  the  entire  college  faculty  being  approximately  $2000; 
and  where  work  is  done  in  the  summer  school  for  short 
periods,  no  extra  compensation  is  allowed.  The  last  ap- 
propriation bill  carried  an  item  for  salary  readjustments 
for  the  college  of  $10,000,  which  was  used  to  add  to  the  pay 
of  those  receiving  the  smaller  salaries,  and  being  so  dis- 
tributed that  the  increase  was  from  $100  to  $300,  only 
one  or  two  receiving  the  latter  sum.  It  is  probably  true 
that  the  college  loses  a  larger  percentage  of  its  teaching 
force  each  year  by  resignation  than  any  other  institution 


A  Mill  Tax  for  Higher  Educational  Institutions      129 

in  the  state,  due,  it  is  claimed,  to  the  active  demand  for 
capable  instructors  in  vocational  studies  and  the  salaries 
paid  being  insufficient  to  hold  them,  the  unsatisfactory  hous- 
ing conditions  being  a  contributing  cause. 

Need  of  More  Land 

The  college  has  3000  acres  of  land,  but  to  carry  on  its 
work  in  agriculture  in  connection  with  the  state  experiment 
station,  and  to  maintain  the  live  stock  essential  to  proper 
instruction  in  animal  husbandry,  it  will  need  more  territory. 

Building  Requirements 

The  administrative  authorities  of  the  Agricultural  and 
Mechanical  College  have  outlined  their  estimate  of  the  needs 
of  state  institution  for  buildings  covering  the  next  ten  years, 
and  places  such  estimate  for  that  period  at  approximately 
$2,500,000,  and  this,  too,  in  the  expectancy  of  the  state 
adopting  the  policy  of  junior  agricultural  schools  teaching 
agriculture  and  animal  husbandry,  which  will  in  some  meas- 
ure restrict  the  ratio  of  increased  attendance  at  the  college 
To  this  sum  must  be  added  an  estimate  for  the  decennium 
approximately  $500,000  to  $750,000,  for  permanent  im- 
provements at  the  Prairie  View  Normal  and  Industrial  Col- 
lege for  colored  youths. 

The  committee  does  not  believe  this  estimate  at  all  exces- 
sive ;  and  further  believes  the  general  policy  pursued  here- 
tofore of  erecting  buildings  especially  designed  for  depart- 
mental service,  preferable  to  the  construction  of  fewer  and 
larger  structures  intended  to  accommodate  unrelated  de- 
partments is  calculated  to  secure  more  advantageous  results 

In  the  State  Agricultural  and  Mechanical  College,  Texas 
may  justly  claim  possession  of  one  of  the  most  progressive 
colleges  devoted  to  vocational  instruction  in  the  Union. -  It 
is  neither  as  large,  nor  is  its  equipment  as  good,  as  a  number 
of  similar  institutions  in  other  states,  but  the  spirit  and 


130  University  of  Texas  Bulletin 

policy,  it  may  be  confidently  asserted,  are  second  to  no 
college  in  the  country  covering  the  same  field. 

(Signed)     LEONARD  TILOTSON,  Chairman. 
OSCAR  DAVIS,  Chairman, 

House  Subcommittee  No.  9. 
I.  E.  CLARK,  Chairman, 

Senate  Subcommittee  No.  9. 

COPY  OF  THE  COMMITTE  REPORT  IN  REFERENCE 
TO  A  CONSTITUTIONAL  AMENDMENT  PRO- 
POSED BY  THE  LEGISLATURE  IN  1913 

Committee  Room,  Austin,  Texas. 

February  8,  1913. 

Hon.  Chester  H.  Terrell,  Speaker  of  the  House  of  Repre- 
sentatives. 

Sir:  Your  Committee  on  Constitutional  Amendments 
having  appointed  me  to  make  a  full  report  on  House  Joint 
Resolution  No.  18,  proposing  and  submitting  to  a  vote  of  the 
people  of  Texas  an  amendment  to  Sections  49  and  52  of 
Article  3,  of  the  Constitution  of  the  State  of  Texas,  authoriz- 
ing the  issuance  of  bonds  and  levying  of  a  tax  to  pay  the 
interest  and  sinking  fund  on  same  for  public  improvements. 
Said  resolution  as  introduced  provided  for  amending  two 
separate  sections  of  the  constitution,  the  committee  decided 
to  separate  the  amendments  and  report  each  favorably,  and 
this  report  is  on  Section  49,  Article  3,  which  the  resolution 
seeks  to  amend  so  as  to  allow  the  issuance  of  bonds  by  the 
state  for  public  improvements.  On  account  of  the  present 
limitations  in  the  constitution  no  bonds  can  be  issued  for 
this  purpose  and  practically  all  of  the  state  institutions 
have  to  depend  on  appropriations  by  the  Legislature  for 
permanent  improvements.  The  legislature  cannot  make 
sufficient  appropriations  at  any  one  time,  without  raising 
the  tax  rate  to  such  an  extent  as  to  cause  general  dissatis- 
faction. If  bonds  are  issued,  much  needed  improvements 
can  be  made  and  the  tax  to  pay  the  interest  and  create  a 
sinking  fund  will  not  be  felt.  I  earnestly  hope  this  resolu- 
tion will  receive  the  approval  of  the  Legislature. 

CALVIN. 


A  Mill  Tax  for  Higher  Educational  Institutions      131 

REQUEST    CONTINUANCE    OF    PRESENT    UNIVER- 
SITY TAX-LEVY  RATE 

Extract  From  the  Report  of  Walter  E.  Clark,  President  of  the 
University  of  Nevada,  for  1920 

Unless  there  be  heavy  unforeseen  emergency  expenditures 
and  unless  there  be  appreciable  lowering  of  the  total  state 
valuation  assessable  for  taxation  within  the  coming  bien- 
nium,  the  University  will  be  able  to  cover  its  general  run- 
ning expenses  if  it  be  granted  the  same  tax  rate  which  was 
granted  by  the  legislature  of  1919.  It  seems  unlikely  that 
the  total  assessable  valuation  of  the  state  will  be  materially 
increased  during  either  of  the  coming  two  years.  If  the 
same  tax  rate  be  granted  to  the  university  and  if  the  assess- 
able valuation  is  not  materially  increased,  the  university 
affairs  will  have  to  be  managed  with  the  most  rigid  econ- 
omy in  order  that  the  university  may  report  to  the  legisla- 
ture of  1923  without  deficit. 

The  retention  of  the  tax-levy  system  as  a  means  for  rais- 
ing most  of  the  university  revenue  from  the  state  is  clearly 
preferable  as  contrasted  with  direct  appropriations  to  cover 
all  state  grants  to  the  university.  The  tax-levy  system  en- 
ables the  university  to  transact  its  biennial  business  with- 
out a  wretched  gap  of  two  months  when  no  state  funds 
would  be  definitely  available.  The  tax-levy  system  makes  it 
less  likely  that  the  university  affairs  will  become  entangled 
in  the  play  of  legislative  politics.  One  of  the  surest  ways 
to  keep  a  state's  university  out  of  politics  is  to  grant  to  the 
university  regularly  a  tax-levy  rate  ample  to  secure  to  the 
university  a  sum  sufficient  to  cover  its  general  running  ex- 
penses so  far  as  these  are  met  from  state  funds. 

STATEMENTS  BY  VARIOUS  STATE  UNIVERSITIES 
AND  COLLEGES 

Collated  by  Miss  Octavia  Rogan,  Legislative  Librarian 

The  University  of  Nebraska. 

The  University  of  Nebraska  is  financed  by  biennial  ap- 
propriations. It  was  supported  by  endowment  income, 


132  University  of  Texas  Bulletin 

university  cash,  specific  special  appropriations  and  grants 
from  congress,  from  its  founding  1869  up  to  1899.  The 
legislature,  1899,  enacted  a  one  mill  levy  law  for  the  ben- 
efit of  the  university.  From  time  to  time  since  then  the 
state  has  made  additional  specific  appropriations  for  lands 
and  buildings  and  also  for  maintenance  and  for  particular 
objects. 

The  legislature  of  1921  repealed  all  mill  levy  laws  of  every 
nature,  except  the  levy  for  the  erection  of  a  new  capitol,  and 
threw  all  items  in  the  budget,  except  the  capitol,  into  the 
general  fund.  This  plan  is  new  and  we  do  not  know  what 
advantage  the  university  or  the  normal  schools  will  find  in  it. 

THe  University  of  Minnesota. 

The  University  of  Minnesota  is  financed  by  biennial  ap- 
propriations and  a  mill  tax.  The  mill  tax  is  subject  to 
variation  with  every  change  in  assessments,  due  to  changes 
in  law  or  valuations.  We  are  fortunate  this  year  in  not 
being  dependent  upon  mill  levy.  Reduction  in  valuations, 
and  removal  of  automobiles  from  general  property  tax 
would  have  been  serious  if  we  were  on  millage  basis.  We 
are  and  should  be  answerable  to  the  representatives  of  the 
people  at  each  session  of  the  legislation.  Any  institution 
that  is  not  willing  and  able  to  submit  to  an  accounting  to 
the  people  is  not  entitled  to  further  appropriations. 

The  University  of  Michigan. 

The  University  of  Michigan  is  financed  by  biennial  ap- 
propriations and  mill  tax.  The  mill  tax  brings  an  annual 
revenue  of  three  million  dollars.  We  find  this  adequate, 
supplemented  as  it  is  at  present  by  special  appropriations 
for  the  Comprehensive  Building  Program.  The  last  ses- 
sion of  the  legislature  made  $4,800,000  available  for  the  ex- 
tension of  the  physical  plant.  The  mill  tax  gives  an  income 
which  can  be  readily  estimated.  The  university  is  at  no 
time  uncertain  as  to  how  much  the  legislature  will  actually 
grant.  Also  the  mill  tax  increases  with  the  taxable  value 
of  the  state,  which  of  course  is  one  of  the  indications  of  a 


A  Mill  Tax  for  Higher  Educational  Institutions      133 

growth  in  the  state  and  consequent  necessity  for  increase 
in  the  facilities  of  the  Institution.  The  governing  body  of 
the  University  of  Michigan  is  the  Regents  of  the  University 
of  Michigan,  a  constitutional  corporation.  The  people  have 
direct  control  through  their  franchise  in  the  election  of  the 
regents.  The  courts  have  decided  that  it  is  the  duty  of  the 
legislature  to  provide  funds  to  maintain  the  university; 
however,  under  certain  circumstances,  the  legislature  may 
direct  how  specific  funds  are  to  be  spent.  In  these  cases 
the  people  would  of  course  have  a  double  check. 

The  University  of  Kansas. 

The  University  of  Kansas  is  financed  by  biennial  appro- 
priations. We  believe  that  in  normal  times  it  is  better  to 
have  the  mill  tax  arrangement  whereby  a  stated  tax  will  be 
used  to  provide  for  the  higher  education  in  the  state,  and 
will  continue  from  year  to  year  unless  changed  by  vote  of 
the  legislature.  I  have  never  yet  known  a  state  institution 
to  admit  that  it  had  adequate  revenue.  My  own  theory  is 
that  the  legislature  is  the  proper  judge  in  a  democracy  as 
to  what  constitutes  adequacy  of  revenue.  It  is  the  business 
of  the  institutions  so  to  make  their  work  function  as  to  con- 
vince the  state  that  they  need  the  revenue  which  they  ask 
for.  An  institution  whose  appropriation  comes  from  the 
legislature  which  is  elected  on  a  partisan  ticket,  and  whose 
board  of  administration  is  appointed  by  the  governor  who 
is  also  elected  on  a  partisan  ticket,  cannot  be  free  from  po- 
litical influence,  but  let  it  be  clearly  understood,  however, 
that  tax  supported  institutions  cannot  be  free  from  political 
influence. 

The  University  of  Indiana. 

The  University  of  Indiana  is  financed  by  biennial  appro- 
priations and  a  mill  tax.  The  mill  tax  enables  the  presi- 
dent and  board  of  trustees  to  know  approximately  what  the 
income  will  be  for  a  long  series  of  years.  In  that  way  they 
are  able  to  make  their  plans  with  assurance  that  they  can 


134  University  of  Texas  Bulletin 

be  carried  out.  We  have  found  our  system  very  satisfac- 
tory in  practice  in  every  way.  There  would  be  many  dis- 
advantages in  relying  on  specific  appropriations. 

The  University  of  Kentucky. 

The  University  of  Kentucky  is  financed  by  biennial  ap- 
propriations and  a  mill  tax.  The  mill  tax  provides  a  steady 
income  and  avoids  the  necessity  of  calling  on  the  Legislature 
at  frequent  intervals.  It  guarantees  permanency  of  in- 
come ;  but  it  does  not  handle  building  programs  when  large 
sums  are  needed  occasionally.  In  our  case  th3  income  is 
small  and  we  can  not  provide  for  a  building  program  out  of 
mill  tax. 

The  University  of  Oregon. 

The  University  of  Oregon  is  financed  by  biennial  appro- 
priations and  a  mill  tax.  This  is  reasonably  satisfactory, 
because  more  permanent  in  nature  than  legislative  appro- 
priation. But  some  method  of  providing  for  regular  in- 
crease in  income  commensurate  with  increase  in  students 
and  costs  would  be  suggested  as  an  improvement  to  this 
method.  Mill  tax  income  is  practically  stationary.  It  is 
more  advantageous  than  biennial  appropriations  because 
more  permanent  in  character,  obviating  the  necessity  for 
frequent  appeal  to  Legislature,  and  making  possible  more 
definite  plans  for  the  future.  The  tendency  of  assessors  to 
keep  down  assessed  valuations  keeps  tax  income  stationary, 
instead  of  increasing  with  the  growth  of  the  university  and 
increase  of  actual  wealth  of  the  state,  as  was  expected  when 
tax  was  instituted. 

The  University  of  Colorado. 

The  University  of  Colorado  is  financed  by  biennial  ap- 
propriations and  a  mill  tax.  The  great  advantage  of  a  mill 
tax  is  a  definite  income  to  work  to;  but  mill  tax  is  hard  to 
get,  consequently  income  is  likely  to  be  too  small. 


A  Mill  Tax  for  Higher  Educational  Institutions      135 

The  University  of  North  Dakota. 

The  University  of  North  Dakota  is  financed  by  biennial 
appropriations.  It  has  its  "ups  and  downs."  Some  legis- 
lative assemblies  give  us  fair  treatment,  others  make  ap- 
propriations that  are  inadequate.  We  have  been  trying  to 
obtain  a  mill  tax. 

The  State  University  of  Montana. 

The  State  University  of  Montana  is  finaced  by  biennial 
appropriations  and  by  the  mill  tax.  The  mill  tax  would  be 
satisfactory  under  normal  conditions,  but  durirg  the  pres- 
ent biennial  period  the  reduction  of  assessed  valuation  of 
the  state  brings  us  in  an  inadequate  income.  Mill  tax  has 
only  been  in  operation  during  the  present  fiscal  year,  but 
certainly  will  afford  us  under  normal  and  stable  conditions 
a  uniform  and  slightly  increased  income,  to  which  may  be 
added  state  approriations  as  necessary. 

The  University  of  Wyoming. 

The  University  of  Wyoming  secures  state  support  through 
a  three-eighth  mill  tax  for  current  expenses  and  a  one- 
eighth  mill  tax  for  building  purposes.  We  think  we  have  a 
fairly  good  method.  This  relieves  us  from  the  necessity  of 
going  before  each  Legislature  and  asking  for  our  appro- 
priations. 

University  of  Nevada. 

This  year,  1922,  the  University  of  Nevada  begins  a  new 
plan — being  wholly  financed  by  mill  tax,  so  far  as  state  ap- 
propriations are  concerned.  We  believe  this  better  than  the 
mixed  mill  tax  and  direct  appropriations  plan  ?n  effect  the 
past  seven  years.  It  gives  as  great  revenue  as  this  state 
can  at  present  fairly  grant  to  its  university.  Under  the 
plan  income  will  proportionately  increase  as  assessed  prop- 
erty increases.  We  are  just  beginning  the  pi  re  mill  tax 
plan.  We  believe,  first,  it  will  minimize  danger  of  political 
difficulty  during  legislative  sessions;  second,  it  will  permit 
growth  of  university's  income  pari  passu  with  growth  of 


136  University  of  Texas  Bulletin 

state's  assessable  property;  and  third,  it  will  enable  the 
university  to  plan  more  definitely  as  to  future  developments. 
The  seven  years  preceding  we  had  partial  mill  tax— partial 
special  appropriations.  We  preferred  the  mill  tax  and 
therefore  asked  for  its  adoption  as  the  sole  source  of  state 
revenue  for  the  university.  The  only  possible  disadvantage 
we  note  for  mill  tax  is,  that,  the  state's  total  assessable  val- 
uation might  be  suddenly  and  possibly  arbitrarily  lowered. 
We  should  expect  in  such  event  to  secure  a  grant  of  an  in- 
creased rate  for  the  university. 

The  University  of  South  Carolina. 

The  University  of  South  Carolina  is  financed  by  annual 
appropriations.  The  appropriations  are  inadequate.  The 
university  has  no  endowment  or  funds  of  any  kind  except 
annual  appropriations  and  fees.  We  suggest  for  the  im- 
provement of  our  method  of  support :  first,  tax  Deform,  and 
second,  a  mill  tax  supplemented  by  annual  appropriations. 

Miami  University  of  Ohio. 

The  Miami  University  of  Ohio  is  supported  through  bi- 
ennial appropriation  with  a  mill  tax  for  building  purposes. 

We  have  not  had  a  mill  tax  levy  for  some  time.  The 
great  trouble  with  mill  tax  is  that  it  is  nev^.r  adequate. 
The  growth  of  the  institution  carries  it  beyond  the  funds 
provided  by  any  tax  levy.  We  do  find  the  mill  tax  for  a 
building  fund  exceedingly  satisfactory.  Under  the  old  sys- 
tem money  was  appropriated  for  a  building,  )ften  an  in- 
adequate amount,  and  we  had  to  make  a  particjlar  appeal 
tor  the  need  of  a  particular  building.  Last  year  the  Legis- 
lature set  aside  a  mill  tax  for  a  building  fund  for  state  in- 
stitutions of  higher  learning  each  of  which  gets  a  certain 
per  cent.  This  will  give  us  $350,000  for  the  biennium  for 
new  buildings,  and  we  are  allowed  to  build  such  buildings 
as  we  seet  fit,  with  the  approval  of  the  controlling  board. 
The  mill  tax  levy  method  of  support  unsupplemented  by 
special  appropriations  unless  exceedingly  liberal,  more  lib- 
eral than  one  could  reasonably  expect  to  pass,  will  not  in  all 
probability  keep  up  with  the  growth  of  the  student  body. 


A  Mill  Tax  for  Higher  Educational  Institutions      137 

State  Normal  and  Industrial  School  of  North  Dakota. 

The  State  Normal  and  Industrial  School  of  North  Dakota 
is  financed  by  biennial  appropriations.  Our  method  is  un- 
satisfactory. We  have  to  run  gauntlet  of  appropriations 
committees  of  the  Legislature  every  two  years.  A  fixed 
millage  or  standing  appropriation  over  a  period  of  years 
would  be  an  improvement.  It  produces  enough  to  survive 
without  allowance  for  expansion  or  growth.  Legislative 
appropriation  is  supplemented  by  institutional  collections 
yielding  some  $5,000  to  $10,000  a  year.  The  old  mill  tax 
in  vogue  up  to  1915  yielded  a  fairly  definite  income,  without 
the  necessity  of  legislative  action,  but  it  is  not  as  easy  to 
get  special  appropriation  for  special  needs  when  the  mill 
tax  plan  is  employed. 

The  mill  tax  plan  is  quite  in  favor  with  the  heads  of 
educational  institutions  in  this  state,  but  the  Legislature 
has  not  deemed  it  best  to  go  back  to  that  method 

East  Tennessee  State  Normal  School. 

The  East  Tennessee  State  Normal  School  is  financed  by 
biennial  appropriations  and  by  an  appropriation  of  a  fixed 
percentage  of  the  total  gross  revenue  of  the  state.  Our 
operating  appropriation  comes  from  a  fixed  percentage  of 
gross  revenue.  Our  building  program  is  cared  for  by  legis- 
lative appropriation.  A  fixed  percentage  has  advantages: 

1.  It  gives  a  definite  increasing  budget. 

2.  It  eliminates  legislative  lobbying. 

3.  It  takes  it  out  of  politics. 

4.  It  unites  all  institutions  sharing  in  the  percentages. 
State  Normal  School,  Oneonta,  N.  Y. 

The  State  Normal  School  of  Oneonta,  N.  Y.,  is  financed 
by  biennial  appropriations.  Our  method  is  satisfactory. 

The  Oklahoma  College  for  Women. 

The  Oklahoma  College  for  Women  is  financed  by  biennial 
appropriations.  We  are  forced  to  go  to  the  state  legisla- 
ture every  two  years  and  spend  much  time  for  two  or  three 
months  pleading  for  enough  money  to  run  our  school.  But 


138  University  of  Texas  Bulletin 

we  never  get  enough.  Over  two  hundred  girls  were  turned 
away  last  fall  because  our  institution  did  not  have  sufficient 
room.  We  asked  for  $145,000  annually  for  running  ex- 
penses and  got  $118,750.  There  is  no  ^ay  to  improve  our 
method  unless  we  can  secure  the  method  of  the  mill  tax. 

The  Indiana  State  Normal  School. 

The  Indiana  State  Normal  School  is  financed  by  biennial 
appropriations.  Our  method  is  unsatisfactory.  We  never 
know,  from  biennium  to  biennium,  where  we  are.  We 
can  make  no  plans  until  the  legislature  has  adjourned.  The 
objection  to  a  mill  tax  is  found  in  the  fact  that  in  times  of 
economic  depression,  the  mill  tax  returns  may  go  down ;  and 
the  increase  in  the  millage  tax  is  seldom  large  enough  to 
keep  pace  with  the  growing  needs  of  the  educational  insti- 
tutions of  a  state. 

The  State  Normal  School ,  Troy,  Alabama. 

The  Alabama  State  Normal  School  is  financed  by  biennial 
appropriations.  Our  method  is  unsatisfactory.  We  are 
trying  now  to  pursuade  our  people  that  a  fixed  percentage 
is  the  only  correct  way  of  supporting  the  higher  institutions. 

(1)  It  operates  automatically. 

(2)  When  the  pro  rata  is  acceptable  to  all  units  of  a 
system,  it  avoids  unseemly  scrambles  before  the  legislature 
by  the  different  units,  each  trying  to  get  more  than  the 
others  or  more  than  its  share. 

Michigan  State  Normal  College. 

The  Michigan  State  Normal  College  is  financed  by  biennial 
appropriations.  Our  system  of  biennial  appropriations  i& 
not  satisfactory,  especially  since  we  have  the  budget  plan 
which  makes  appropriations  for  specific  schedules.  The 
reason  is  that  some  schedules  get  exhausted  and  others  have 
favorable  balances,  but  the  funds  cannot  be  transferred 
from  one  schedule  to  another  without  permission  from  the 
State  Administrative  Board. 

The  normal  schools  of  Michigan  are  trying  to  get  a  mill 


A  Mill  Tax  for  Higher  Educational  Institutions      139 

tax  for  all  expenses  except  special  appropriations  for  build- 
ings, etc.  Our  reasons  for  thinking  the  mill  tax  advisable 
are  as  follows : 

1.  It  saves  the  biennial  thrashing  over  of  old  straw,  or 
new  so  far  as  that  is  concerned,  with  the  legislature. 

2.  As  the  valuation  of  the  state  increases  the  income 
would  increase  proportionately. 

3.  We  have  every  reason  to  believe  that  the  mill  tax 
would  come  into  the  hands  of  the  State  Board  of  Education, 
to  be  handled  according  to  its  discretion. 

Of  course,  if  the  mill  tax  should  not  be  adequate  we  would 
be  no  better  off;  but  if  it  should  be  of  sufficient  size,  we 
should  undoubtedly  be  better  off.  The  University  of  Michi- 
gan and  Michigan  Agricultural  College  are  on  the  mill  tax 
basis,  and  their  governing  boards  have  full  control  of  their 
funds. 

The  Northern  Arizona  Normal  School. 

The  Northern  Arizona  Normal  School  is  financed  by  bi- 
ennial appropriations.  Under  our  new  law,  compelling  the 
Governor  to  submit  a  budget  to  the  Legislature,  we  are 
very  well  taken  care  of. 

The  University  of  Arizona  went  to  the  mill  tax  basis, 
last  winter ;  at  that  time,  the  normal  schools  had  an  offer  to 
get  in  on  the  same  plan,  but  we  rejected  it,  and  I  think  very 
wisely,  because  a  special  session  of  the  Legislature  is  now 
necessary  in  order  to  enable  the  university  to  finish  the 
year.  At  the  end  of  the  year,  its  income  yielded  under  the 
mill  tax  will  probably  be  sufficient  to  pay  all  expenses  of 
the  year,  but  due  to  the  fact  that  it  has  no  reserve  fund, 
to  the  fact  that  the  December  taxes  were  ten  per  cent  de- 
linquent, and  to  the  further  fact  that  its  building  program 
concentrated  its  expenses  in  the  first  few  months  of  the 
year,  the  university  finds  itself  without  money  and  without 
credit.  The  normal  schools  have  been  in  better  position, 
because  while  their  funds  have  been  exhausted,  state  war- 
rants have  been  issued  which  our  banks  will  accept. 


140  University  of  Texas  Bulletin 

Central  Michigan  Normal  School. 

The  Central  Michigan  Normal  School  is  financed  by  bi- 
ennial appropriations.  We  do  not  have,  and  have  not  had 
the  mill  tax.  Our  institution  is  run  by  appropriations  made 
every  two  years  by  the  State  Legislature.  We  do  not  find 
this  a  satisfactory  method  for  many  reasons. 

First:  We  have  to  convince  the  Legislature  each  year 
of  our  needs. 

Second :  The  budget  system  is  not  elastic  enough  to  take 
care  of  increased  attendance,  etc. 

Third:  We  feel  that  politics  is  mixed  up  in  the  matter 
more  than  should  be  in  educational  institutions 

The  loiva  State  Teachers  College. 

The  Iowa  State  Teachers  College  is  financed  by  biennial 
appropriations.  We  have  had  no  experience  with  the  mill 
tax,  except  for  building  purposes  for  ten  years,  but  each 
amount  appropriated  needed  to  be  acted  upon  by  succeeding 
legislatures  which  approved  plans  of  building  purposes  and 
amounts  to  be  expended  for  each  building. 

State  Teaching  College,  San  Diego,  California. 

The  California  State  Teaching  College  is  financed  by  bi- 
ennial appropriations.  Our  revenue  is  adequate  for  1921 
to  1923,  but  appropriations  alone  are  uncertain.  We  would 
prefer  combination  of  mill  tax  and  biennial  appropriations. 

The  Indiana  State  Normal  School. 

The  Indiana  State  Normal  School  is  financed  by  a  mill 
tax.  Our  method  is  satisfactory.  It  gives  definite  income 
which  is  known  in  advance.  The  mill  tax  is  the  only  method 

we  have  ever  had. 

i 

The  Arkansas  State  Normal  School. 

The  Arkansas  State  Normal  School  is  financed  by  biennial 
appropriations  and  a  mill  tax. 

1.     Our  normal  school  gets  by  legislative  action  one-fifth 


A  Mill  Tax  for  Higher  Educational  Institutions      141 

of  one  mill  annually  of  state  taxes  for  the  support  and  main- 
tenance of  the  institution.  This  is  definite  and  the  govern- 
ing board  can  make  its  plans  definitely. 

2.  Before  this  millage  tax  can  be  spent  by  the  school, 
a  biennial  appropriation  is  made  by  the  Legislature,  as  pre- 
pared and  suggested  by  the  governing  board  of  the  school. 
This  gives  the  people  who  pay  the  taxes,  through  the  Legis- 
lature, a  chance  to  know  for  what  purpose  the  money  is 
being  spent,  and  a  chance  to  stop  any  misuse  or  diversion  of 
funds. 

3.  Apparently  the  only  improvement  we  could  suggest 
would  be  an  increase  in  millage  so  as  to  take  care  of  grow- 
ing institution. 

4.  Under  our  former  method,  our  appropriations  de- 
pended on  the  mood  and  will  of  the  Legislature,  and  the 
amount  appropriated  depended  largely  on  the  activity  of 
interested  parties  in  getting  the  needs  before  the  Legisla- 
ture, which  resulted  in  undue  political  influence. 

State  Normal  School,  Salem,  Massachusetts. 

The  State  Normal  School  of  Salem,  Massachusetts  is 
financed  by  annual  appropriations.  Our  method  is  unsatis- 
factory. We  are  subject  to  the  whims  as  well  as  other 
conditions  which  influence  a  supervisor  of  administration, 
a  Governor  and  a  Legislature,  annually.  The  disposition 
to  secure  a  low  rate  of  state  tax  often  prevents  a  legitimate 
and  wise  investment  in  education. 

The  Colorado  Agricultural  College. 

The  Colorado  Agricultural  College  is  financed  by  bien- 
nial appropriations,  a  mill  tax,  and  tax  for  buildings.  Our 
method  is  very  satisfactory,  for  we  always  know  within 
a  few  dollars  how  much  money  we  will  have  to  spend  for 
years  in  advance.  The  mill  tax  prevents  us  from  having 
to  go  to  the  Legislature  every  session  for  money,  and  it  also 
enables  us  to  make  plans  for  years  ahead.  It  assists  in 
keeping  the  institution  out  of  politics,  but  it  is  not  flexible 
enough  to  meet  every  need. 


142  University  of  Texas  Bulletin 

The  Western  Illinois  State  Teachers  College. 

The  Western  Illinois  State  Teachers  College  is  financed 
by  biennial  appropriations.  Our  method  is  unsatisfactory, 
because  we  must  depend  each  two  years  on  the  General  As- 
sembly for  our  support.  Sometimes  they  are  liberal  and 
sometimes  they  are  not.  We  never  know  what  we  are  going 
to  get.  We  ought  to  have  some  sort  of  millage  tax  because 
a  permanent  charge  against  the  State  ought  to  have  a 
permanent  support.  We  have  had  no  experience  with  the 
millage  tax  in  the  normal  schools  in  this  state.  The  state 
university  is  so  maintained  and  it  is  able  to  get  a  great 
deal  better  support  than  are  the  normal  schools.  The  only 
disadvantage  of  the  mill  tax  is  that  it  fails  to  meet  any 
emergency  which  may  fall  upon  an  institution  unexpected- 
ly. If  a  sufficient  amount,  however,  is  provided  through  the 
millage  for  new  buildings  a  school  can  usually  meet  all 
emergencies  in  that  respect  unless  burned  out  completely. 

The  Eastern  South  Dakota  State  Normal  School. 

The  South  Dakota  State  Normal  School  is  financed  by 
biennial  appropriations.  We  must  depend  upon  whatever 
the  Legislature  decides  to  give.  A  mill  tax,  if  adequately 
apportioned,  would  be  more  satisfactory.  We  should  then 
know  what  funds  were  to  be  available  and  could  plan  ahead 
for  enlargements  as  funds  became  available.  We  have 
never  tried  the  Mill  tax.  We  are  dependent  entirely  upon 
the  attitude  of  the  state  legislature  which  meets  every  two 
years.  There  is  a  budget  board  which  makes  recommenda- 
tions to  the  legislature  as  to  the  amount  of  appropriation 
in  their  judgment  that  should  be  made  to  each  institution. 
The  legislature  is  free  to  differ  in  this  recommendation. 
The  board  of  regents  and  the  head  of  each  institution  rec- 
ommends to  the  budget  committee  the  amount  that  is  needed 
for  each  institution. 

The  Spearfish  Normal  School. 

The  Spearfish  Normal  School  is  financed  by  biennial  ap- 
propriations. Our  method  is  not  entirely  satisfactory. 


A  Mill  Tax  for  Higher  Educational  Institutions      143 

We  are  at  the  whim  of  any  legislature  which  can  cripple  or 
destroy  us  if  it  chooses.  We  should  like  a  mill  tax  for  run- 
ning expenses  at  least. 

The  Ellensburg  (Washington)  State  Normal  School. 

The  Ellensburg  State  Normal  School  is  financed  by  bien- 
nial appropriations  and  a  mill  tax.  Our  method  is  satis- 
factory. The  mill  tax  provides  the  funds  annually  and  the 
biennial  appropriation  makes  the  fund  available  and  at  the 
same  time  leaves  the  control  in  the  legislature.  It  gives 
stability  and  enables  plans  to  be  made  extending  a  few 
years  ahead — at  least  four  years  each  mill  tax  period.  It 
tends  to  lessen  "political  jockeying"  and  in  the  end  contri- 
butes much  more  consistent  results  to  the  state  due  to  con- 
servative and  constructive  administration.  The  advantages 
greatly  outweigh  the  disadvantages.  With  the  interest 
fund  to  act  as  an  equalizer  to  meet  emergencies,  the  disad- 
vantages are  at  a  minimum. 

The  Montana  State  College. 

The  Montana  State  College  is  financed  by  biennial  appro- 
priations and  a  mill  tax.  The  mill  tax  was  passed  in  1920 
and  is  effective  for  the  first  time  in  1921.  We  therefore  are 
in  no  position  to  judge  its  permanent  effectiveness.  Our 
method  provides  for  certain  incomes  from  a  mill  tax  but 
this  is  not  large  enough  to  provide  suitable  operating  funds 
so  we  go  to  the  Legislature  for  direct  appropriations.  As 
stated  before,  the  mill  tax  plan  is  new  and  we  therefore 
have  no  experience  to  record. 

DATA  IN  REGARD  TO  28  STATE-SUPPORTED  COLLEGES 
AND  UNIVERSITIES 

By  Department  of  the  Interior,  Bureau  of  Education 
(George   A.   Zook,   Specialist  in   Higher   Education) 

Comparative  Enrollments 
1921-1922 

Estimated 

Name  of  Institution  1919-20*          October         Total  for 

15, 1921         the  Year 

University  of  California 11,903  12,882  14,170 

University  of   Colorado 1,927  2,366  2.700 

Colorado  Agricultural  College  669  824  600 


144 


University  of  Texas  Bulletin 


University  of  Illinois 7,935  8,984  9,400 

Indiana  University   3,783  2,808  3,700 

State  University  of  Iowa 4,361  5,749  4,714 

University  of  Kansas 3,477  3,661  4,102 

Kansas      State     Agricultural 

College 2,560  2,391  2,600 

University  of  Michigan 8,652  9,082  9,682 

Michigan  Agricultural  College  1,425  1,619  1,650 

University  of  Minnesota 10,369  7,637  9,900 

Mississippi    Agricultural    and 

Mechanical  College 1,169  1,350  1,450 

Mississippi   State   College   for 

Women 965  865  900 

University   of    Nebraska 5,248  4,740  5?000 

New    Hampshire    College    of 
Agriculture  and  Mechanic 

Arts 817  865  920 

University  of  North  Carolina  1,437  1,600  1,700 
North     Carolina     College     of 
Agriculture  and  Engineer- 
ing   796  785  900 

Ohio  State  University 7,151  7,600  8,000 

University   of    Oklahoma 2,608  2,963  5,000 

Oklahoma     Agricultural     and 

Mechanical  College 1,314  1,063  1,500 

Oregon  State  Agricultural  Col- 
lege   3,442  3,140  3,500 

University  of  Oregon 1,889  2,006  2,200 

Pennsylvania    State   College..  3,294  3,130  3,200 

University  of  Texas 4,418  4,462  4,700 

Agricultural    and    Mechanical 

College  of  Texas 1,549  1,400  1,500 

State  College  of  Washington.  2,184  1,718  1,900 

University  of  Washington 5,520  4,442  5,200 

University  of  Wisconsin 7,146  7,418  7,800 

INCOME  OF  28  STATE-SUPPORTED  COLLEGES  AND  UNI- 
VERSITIES FOR  RESIDENT  TEACHING 


Institution 


Federal       Students     All  Other 
State     Government       Fees  Sources 


University  of  California  $3,620,000     $    50,000     $  550,000     $1,205,408 
University  of   Colorado.        380,000     175,000          120,000 


*The  figures  for  this  year  were  taken  from  the  Bureau  of  Education  Bulletin 
No.  48,  1920.  They  may  not  correspond  exactly  with  those  in  the  other  two 
columns  of  this  circular. 


A  Mill  Tax  for  Higher  Educational  Institutions      145 


Colorado        Agricultural 
College 

210  000 

69  000 

16  000 

Qn  (\o(\ 

University  of  Illinois... 
Indiana    University.  . 

3,321,865 
816316 

313,408 
7  351 

550,000 
196  903 

192,800 
131  508 

State  University  of  Iowa 

1,901,647 

University    of    Kansas.. 
Kansas     State     Agricul- 
tural College.  .   . 

1,000,500 
709,000 

900 
50  000 

200,000 
100  000 

112,000 
380  000 

University  of  Michigan. 
Michigan       Agricultural 
College 

3,150,000 
1  000  000 

38,416 
120  000 

964,100 
150  000 

1,729,250 
200  000 

University  of  Minnesota 
Mississippi    Agricultural 
College       

2,845,460 
259  000 

95,750 
22200 

562,000 
23  000 

369,000 

Mississippi  State  College 
for  Women  

142,681 

4,125 

606,880 

University  of  Nebraska. 
New  Hampshire   College 
o  f    Agriculture    and 
Mechanic  Arts  
University  of  North  Car- 
olina     

1,620,300 

282,401 
900,000 

55,500 
663,625 

200,000 

60,000 
131  204 

450,000 
73,017 

North    Carolina    College 
of  Agriculture  and  En- 
gineering   

275,000 

41,000 

375,000 

Ohio   State  University.  . 
University  of  Oklahoma 

1,809,224 
843,252 

50,000 

350,000 
150,000 

1,000,000 

Oklahoma      Agricultural 
and     Mechanical     Col- 
lege. 

465,250 

45,000 

5  500 

85  000 

Oregon     State     Agricul- 
tural College  

980,053 

71,500 

45,000 

University  of  Oregon  .  .  . 

847,340 

54,000 

17,700 

Pennsylvania   State   Col- 
lege   

853,000 

113,000 

270  000 

University  of  Texas  .... 
Agricultural      and      Me- 
chanical College  of 
Texas.   . 

1,297,000 
730  134 

8,000 
37  500 

115,000 
71  500 

210,000 
264  000 

State   College   of   Wash- 
ington   

613,982 

50,000 

46  100 

40  220 

University      o  f      Wash- 
ington   

973,504 

77  916 

35  000 

University  of  Wisconsin 

2,958,185 

50,000 

611,895 

440,425 

oo 
oo 


ooooooo 
ooooooo 


o 
o 

CM 

«l 


ooooocooo 
o  o  o  p  o  co  o  p 
ooo^o'cooo 

LOOO^CMCOOO 

t-ifjTH^o^T-^co^o^ 


ooo 
ooo 

rH    C-    T^« 
r-J^  00^  T-J 

CO*"  CM"  CO 


O 

o 

CQ 

to 


ooooooo 
ooooooo 


8§§ 

§"ooooo"o"oooo* 
ooooio-^oooo 
o^cop^cot-p^o^iooo^co^ 
co"  CM"  CM"  co"  CM"  CM"  CM"  CM"  co"  CM"  co" 


o  o  o  o 

p  p  p  p 

o  co'  o  o 

10  co  o  o 


ooo 
ooo 


oo 
o 


ooo 

LO    o   O 


•  o     •  o 
-o     -o 


s, 


O    CO 

10  oo 

lot- 


T* 


o  o 
o  o 

§§' 

t>  o^ 

CM"  co" 


§§     § 


s§ 

°°.  ^ 


g§§ 


ooo 
ooo 
o  o  o  o  o  o 
o  o  o  o  o  o 

00    O    CM    O    00^  p^ 

CM"  CM"  CM"  co"  i-T  co" 


ooooooo 
o  o  o  o  o  o  o 


ooooooo 
o  o  o  o  o  to  o 

1C    ^t    10^  00^  ^  CM^  ^ 

<>f  co"  co"  co"  co"  co"  co" 


§ 


ooo 

co  o  o 


o 

0 

0 
0 

CO 

§ 

o 

LO 
CM 

§ 
0 

§ 

0 
10 
CM 

§ 

CM 

10 

§ 

o 
t> 

rH 

o 

0 
0 
0 

o 

0 

§ 

7-1 

o 
p 

CD 

as 

0 
0 
CO 

CO 

887.00 

CO 

rf 

"tf 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

Tf 

CO 

CO 

CO 

II 


oooooooo 
oooooooo 


oo 
oo 


§8 


O    O    O    O 

poop 

o"  o  o  o  o  o  o 

ooooooo 

o  co  ^  oo  n^  tq^  oo^ 

co"  co"  CM"  CM"  CM"  CM"  co" 


o  o  o, 

o  p  o 

o  o  d 

co"  CM  CO 


§•§-§§ 
§§§§ 


§OOOO 
poop 

o  o  o  o  o 
o  o  o  o  o 


ooo 
pop 

O    O    C) 

ooo 
co  p^  p^ 
co"  co"  10" 


oo 

OO 


o  o 
o  o 


;  o  o  o  o  o  o  o 

;  o  o  10  o  o  o  o 

•  p^  ^  "^  °^  °^  ^  ^ 

•  \£$  "^fi    CO    XO    ^J*    "^    ^^ 


"= 


« 


c  <y 

S  I 


1    .3 


a, 


"  g-s^ 


% 


oma 
ral  and 


s 

*s 

bit) 
A 

*s  ^ 

a>  -tf 

•M 
SI 

o 


Universi 
Oklahom 


p  g 
.s  S 

6S 

<J  ° 

^•8 

0} 

^^ 
'g 

<n 
>• 

g'S 
o  P 


S) 

r2 

"o 

o 
5 

5 

02 

.2 

c 

r 


go 


gg 

gc 

(2  is 


Vi 

3 

^      M 

^3    aJ 

I  g 
^H 

<t 


Value             Total 
of               Working 
Buildings         Income 

$11,506,932     $5,844,464 

Mill      Receipts 
Tax        from 
Rate     Mill  Tax 

1,110,000          647,225 

2/5     $    500,000 

755,000 
4,866,749 
1,392,481 
3,179,223 
2,395,000 


766,196  1/5 
3,916,249  2/3 

927,205  28/100 

2,378,839  

1,149,409  


1,078,684   1,604,646 


1,300,000 
6,249,502 
6,319,776 


1,443,426  1/5 
3,875,735  3/8 
4,408,436  23/100 


860,895    899,652 


530,500 
2,653,139 


950,000 
987,990 


699,995 
3,177,293 
1,218,754 


1,282,453 

1,227,712 
1,111,871 

1,975,386 
1,582,810 


461,709 
470,687 


790,082 

2,622,924 

942,096 


122,059 

2,535,000 

638,127 


A  Mill  Tax  for  Higher  Educational  Institutions      147 
PROPERTY  AND   INCOME   OF  29   STATE   UNIVERSITIES 

By  the  Department  of  the  Interior,  Bureau  of  Education 


Name   of   Institution 


University  of  California 

University  of  Colorado. . 

Colorado  Agricultural 
College 

University    of    Illinois... 

Indiana  University   .... 

State  University  of  Iowa 

University   of   Kansas.  . 

Kansas  State  Agricul- 
tural College  

Michigan  Agricultural 
College 

University    of    Michigan 

University  of  Minnesota 

Mississippi  Agricultural 
&  Mechanical  College 

Mississippi  State  College 
for  Women  

University  of   Nebraska 

New  Hampshire  College 
o  f  Agriculture  and 
Mechanic  Arts  

University  of  North 
Carolina 

North  Carolina  College 
o  f  Agriculture  and 
Engineering 

Ohio   State  University.  . 

University  of  Oklahoma 

Oklahoma  Agricultural 
and  Mechanical  Col- 
lege  

Oregon  State  Agricul- 
tural College 

University    of    Oregon . . 

Pennsylvania  State  Col- 
lege  r 

University    of    Texas . .  . 


593,578 

1,818,750 

590,851 


175,461     

2,395,856  1          848,095 


1,130,320         4/10          198,087 
1,077,511         3/10          297,130 


1,622,781 
1,436,809 


148 


University  of  Texas  Bulletin 


Agricultural  and  Me- 
chanical College  o  f 
Texas 

College  of  Industrial 
Arts  (Texas)  

State  College  of  Wash- 
ington  

University  o  f  Wash- 
ington. . 1,212,514 


2,098,929       1,876,516 
858,528          445,209 
1,455,294       1,227,973 
1,479,034 


University  of  Wisconsin       5,102,637       3,483,640 


(6) 

(7) 
3/8 


450,332 

903,731 
1,525,600 


THE   TEACHING   FORCE   IN   29   STATE   UNIVERSITIES   AND 
STATE  COLLEGES   FOR  THE   YEAR  1919-20 

By  the  Department  of  the  Interior,  Bureau  of  Education 


Names  of  Institutions 


Professors  and  Instructors 
Men        Women         Total 


University  of  California 739  189 

University  of   Colorado 205  29  234 

Colorado    Agricultural    College 56  21  77 

University  of  Illinois 822  126  948 

Indiana  University   169  28  197 

State  University  of  Iowa 206  57  263 

University   of   Kansas 247  64  311 

Kansas  State  Agricultural  College 151  69  220 

University  of  Michigan 449  5  454 

Michigan   Agricultural    College 145  26  171 

University  of  Minnesota 712  102  814 

Mississippi   Agricultural   and   Mechan- 
ical College 103  9  112 

Mississippi  State  College  for  Women  6  60  66 

University   of   Nebraska 268  70  338 

New    Hampshire    College    of    Agricul- 
ture  and    Engineering 56  11  67 

University  of  North  Carolina 112  18  130 

North  Carolina  College  of  Agriculture 

and  Engineering 64  20  84 

Ohio  State  University 46  27  73 

University  of  Oklahoma 160  20  180 

Oklahoma  Agricultural  and  Mechanical 

College 102  35  137 

Oregon   State  Agricultural   College. .  .  163  49  212 

University    of    Oregon 120  36  156 


A  Mill  Tax  for  Higher  Educational  Institutions       14°> 

Pennsylvania   State   College 185  26  211 

University   of   Texas 234  48  282 

Agricultural    and    Mechanical    College 

of  Texas 132  ...  132 

College  of  Industrial  Arts   (Texas) ...  20  84  104 

State  College  of  Washington 127  38  165   . 

University   of    Washington 188  37  225 

University  of  Wisconsin 460  92  552 

Rank  of  the  states  in  which  the  universities  and  colleges  shown 
in  the  previous  tables  are  located,  according  to  population,  1920 
Census. 

Pennsylvania 8,720,017 

Illinois 6,485,280 

Ohio 5,759,394 

Texas 4,663,228 

Michigan 3,668,412 

California 3,426,861 

Indiana 2,930,390 

Wisconsin ! 2,632,067 

North    Carolina 2,559,123 

Iowa 2,404,021 

Minnesota 2,387,125 

Oklahoma 2,028,283 

Mississippi 1,790,618 

Kansas 1,769,257 

Washington 1,356,621 

Nebraska 1,296,372 

Colorado 939,629 

Oregon.   . 783,389 

New    Hampshire 443,082 


A  MILL  TAX  FOR  THE  HIGHER  EDUCATIONAL 
INSTITUTIONS 

PREPARED  BY  DR.  E.  T.  MILLER 

Advantages  Claimed  for  a  Mill  Tax. 

1.  Steadiness  of  income.     Does  away  with  uncertainty. 

2.  Will  increase  with  the  wealth  of  the  state,  and  will 
thereby  be  a  guarantee  of  minimum  support. 

3.  Permits  planning  for  the  future,  and  will  therefore 
result  in  more  economical  and  efficient  administration. 

4.  Does  away  with  the  annual  or  biennial  struggle  with 
the  Legislature  and  the  Executive  for  support. 

5.  Institution  will  be  less  in  politics. 

Disadvantages  Claimed  for  a  Mill  Tax. 

1.  Inadequate  by  itself. 

2.  Possible  failure  of  revenue  to  grow  in  proportion  to 
the  growth  of  the  needs  of  the  institutions.     Assessed  val- 
ues may  decrease,  as  they  did  in  Texas  in  1922. 

3.  Possibility  of  a  change  in  the  tax  system;  for  ex- 
ample, the  substitution  of  an  income  tax  for  the  tax  on 
personal  property,  or  the  adoption  of  a  classified  property 
tax,  or  the  adoption  of  separation  of  sources  of  state  and 
local  revenues. 

4.  Difficulty  of  meeting  emergencies. 

5.  Necessity  of  going  to  the  Legislature  for  extra  needs, 
thus  making  necessary  the  annual  or  biennial  struggle. 

6.  In  case  the  proceeds  of  the  tax  are  subject  to  appro- 
priation by  the  Legislature,  there  is  the  recurrent  struggle. 

7.  In  case  there  is  one  levy  for  all  of  the  higher  educa- 
tional institutions,  there  is  the  possibility  of  a  scramble 
among  the  institutions  and  a  struggle  with  the  Legislature 
or  with  the  board  which  makes  the  apportionment. 

8.  Without  a  state  board  of  equalization  of  assessed  tax 
values  and  without  a  modernized  tax  system  a  mill  tax 
simply  aggravates  the  existing  inequalities  and  injustices 


g 

> 

o 

-IJ 
03 
Q 

•1 

(N                   rH                                  CO 
OS                   OS                                  OS 

TH                            TH                                                   TH 

*-•«»- 

OS           00             ,>    OS    OS    OO                          OS 
TH           TH             |>    TH    TH    *H                          iH 
IP 

* 

CQ 


10     OS  00     o  <O  t> 

t-    oo  oo   os  t-  oo 


t-  U5  O 
C-  t-  (M 


hit 

>  T3   ,£  TH 

'S  S  C  - 


w  p 


§6 


- 

2  ^ 


-c 


£  00  TH 

^  t-  IO 

00  »0  00 

oo  52  S 

^v  Oi  Oi 

TH  1C  10 


5 


O 

^  o   o 
oo   n! 

O   TH        ^^ 


OS 

iH 

f  § 


>  P3 

co               g                          o 

—,        ~,                   -J-3                  ^                    C 

'S 

«§.        »                       42 

§      1      c             3  § 

TH    r-T     tQ    •—  i      Q;                                e<O                                      f— 

1—4                    ^         fj                                                  H                                                                           •— 

p-r.i;  -4c                          w 

^S.^S^                              OOrH                                        C 

§-     g     &     °^  § 

10      C               °              -t-1               W    T5 

^  o       »      "S-|  S|     , 

O>    M           c          ^_  T3    ^           C 
O    -»J                            JU    '2     W    O     0) 

c       S      *g  S       o  o 

SC     T}*                                rH    ^O 

°?                 \     ^                                            ^      TH 

,  g   8        ^         «  oo  g  \  w 

'•-^(M           TH           H^CO^^W^^ 

E>3 

>»      «  c      -2 

i 

1 

g                        |                                         |                                                  ^ 

j£       c   5        o        * 

§      3     -1  -^     «     J 

g 

On]                                    (H                                           C 

.pi                                                 c 

<          <                 6                     S 

1    S   11   1   1 

*             M             HJ    S             S             S 

"0 

0 

TH                       CO                                         CO                                                  ^t 

to        co        t>  06        os        o 

Q       r§ 

O5 

I 

£ 

O     t-     rH 
(M     rH     rH 
O5    O5    O5 
rH    rH    rH 

1-^ 
05 
r-l 

cJ 

0 
rH 

t- 

05 
00 
rH 

•^    «H 
.2      °              -t-> 
+i      M      <0      O 

|J      0)    +i      ft 

o  O2    3 

o>  2      CQ 
PHCL 

LO            CD 

o 
cc 

CO 

0 
O 
rH 

Tf             CO 

s 

L.t 

SO 

05 
t- 

g 

£     O    O5 

rH 

\ 

-^ 

10                  O5        rH 

O5             rH 

30  University 

rH 
CO    "^ 

O 

rH 

"S 

1     -c 

P       ^ 

<M           lO 

T^                      C- 

>. 

'S 

rH 

o 

rH 

'rH 

«    b£ 

•^     -<^ 

O 

o 

—  < 
CO 

cu 

03    o 

CO 
1O 

^5            CO    ""^ 

rH 

rS     ° 

2  ° 

«O           CO 

c- 

2  °°~ 

2  ^ 

oo 

00           O     O 
•<3<            iO    "^ 

05 

O    00 

O    CO 

^  t- 

rH              00 

I>          (M 

co 

o  o 

3S 

o 

05 

oo        53. 

CM 

rH 

«»- 

CO             rH 

S- 

w- 

rH 

•d 

,__, 

VI 

Ml 

S      «2 

03 

V< 

y 

o 

., 

'TJ    ^ 

S  g 

r-4        CS 

S  £ 
g  S 

pj    ^^     cS 

V 

on 

o    o 

r.  -o  * 

.2 

^ 

o 

OS 

'C      -"     £H 
^    'g    5 

5 

<: 

^    a, 

H  § 

! 

1 

1 

0) 

e 

a'S  '£ 

rD      W< 

3 

fcp 

s 

0 

1  s 

og 

1   1 
<M    ^0 

02 

T—  I 

CU 

bfi 

O      0    "^ 

» 

'"I    rH 

•H 

'  °  s 

3 

o 

•  "S  -u 

__j_j 

O    ^J 

S    §    C 

c 

§ 

rH       C 

o>    u 

°    a 

^       m       rH 

a> 
M 

o 
o 

§ 

«  &S, 

& 

ae- 

^ 

'S     0) 

$-1    -t-J 

X          >> 

§    a 

>>  rf    CO 

CO 

X 

^ 

|d 

,-,    rH    <M      ft 
§    <N    <M     oj 

0    O5    O5     ;-, 
-W    rH    rH      fcO 

's 

_!_>    OO 

o> 

Isa 

t> 

§ 

0 

3 

|       Jg        «"    rS 

S  *  "S  "S  5 

r-*                 0}       D       Q 

S  xt   o    o    ^ 

§ 

0 

1 

CO 

10 

1 

"s 

4J 

C 

,-j  g 

«»< 

00 

>,»   rH    O3    CO     <U 
rH^    **-'   rH    rH    W 

rH 

So 

rf? 

rH 

^ 

CO    ^ 

5* 

OJ 

'• 

O 

C 

•4-j 

•      02 

02               * 

g     "S     5 
•S      g      S 

r?                 Z                 Z 

.2 
O 

Oregon  .  .  . 

Tennessee- 
Utah  

Washingto 

Wisconsin 

Wyoming. 

rH            OJ            CO 

rH              rH              rH 

2 

rH 

SO    l> 

rH    rH 

oc 

r- 

05 

rH 

CJ 
CN 

A  Mill  Tax  for  Higher  Educational  Institutions      153 

of  the  operation  of  the  general  property  tax.  All  mill  tax 
states  have  state  boards  of  equalization.  Texas  has  no 
such  board. 

9.  If  adequate  and  not  specifically  appropriated  by  the 
Legislature,  the  institutions  may  be  less  responsive  to  state 
needs  and  sentiment. 

10.  If  inadequate  by  itself  and  subject  to  supplementary 
and  specific  appropriations,  no  advantage  over  the  wholly- 
appropriation  method. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY  AND  ADDITIONAL  DATA 

Arizona.  Session  Laws,  1921,  p.  159.  Proceeds  are  available  with- 
out further  appropriation.  Proceeds  may  be  used  for  mainte- 
nance and  construction.  Normals  were  offered  the  mill  tax 
method  of  support  but  refused  it. 

Arkansas.  Acts  of  1917,  Vol.  1,  p.  631.  Acts  of  1919,  p.  32.  The 
total  of  one  and  one-ninth  mills  is  deducted  from  the  general 
revenue  rate.  Proceeds  are  subject  to  appropriation  by  the  Leg- 
islature. 

Colorado.  Constitutional  amendment  adopted  November  2,  1920. 
Session  Laws,  1921,  pp.  179,  591,  647,  649,  694,  794,  and  16. 
Its  levy  is  within  the  discretion  of  the  General  Assembly.  The 
General  Assembly  specifies  the  rate  for  each  institution. 

Illinois.  Rev.  Stats.  1917,  Ch.  120,  Arts.  400  and  401.  Laws  of 
Illinois,  1921,  p.  149.  In  1911  the  rate  was  fixed  at  one  mill. 
It  was  reduced  to  two-thirds  mill  in  1919.  Large  additional  ap- 
propriations. 

Indiana.  Burns'  Annotated  Indiana  Statutes.  Revision  of  1914,  Vol. 
3,  p.  459.  Acts,  1913,  Ch.  182.  In  1883  a  rate  of  one-half  of  one 
cent  was  levied  for  thirteen  years.  In  1895  changed  to  one-sixth 
of  one  mill.  In  1903  changed  to  two  and  three-fourths  cents. 
A  total  of  seven  cents  is  levied  for  the  state  educational  institu- 
tions. A  law  of  1919  provides  that  if  there  is  an  increase  in 
the  valuation  of  property,  the  tax  levy  shall  be  proportionately 
reduced.  This  automatically  lowered  the  educational  levy  from 
seven  cents  to  two  and  eight-tenths  cents.  Emergency  condi- 
tions in  1920  led  to  an  addition  of  one/ cent  to  the  levy.  In  1921 
the  tax  was  changed  to  five  cents,  Indiana  University  to  receive 
two-fifths  of  the  proceeds,  Purdue,  two-fifths,  and  Indiana  State 
Normal,  one-fifth.  The  Legislature  apportions  the  levy.  Pur- 
pose or  use  not  restricted. 

Kentucky.  Special  tax  for  A.  and  M.  goes  back  to  1880.  Later  the 
University  and  the  A.  and  M.  consolidated.  Acts,  1918,  p.  12. 


154  University  of  Texas  Bulletin 

Available  without  further  appropriation.  Use  not  restricted. 
It  is  a  segregated  part  of  the  general  state  rate. 

Louisiana.     Constitution,  1921,  p.  96. 

Michigan.  Compiled  Laws  of  Michigan,  1915,  Vol.  1,  p.  642.  Prac- 
tice goes  back  to  1867.  Tax  was  made  one  mill  in  1893.  Was 
changed  to  three-eights  mill  in  1907.  Available  without  further 
appropriation.  No  restriction  as  to  use.  Large  additional  ap- 
propriations. 

Minnesota.  General  Statutes,  1913,  Arts.  2915  and  3024,  Sec.  2. 
Laws,  1919,  Ch.  289,  and  Laws,  1921,  p.  608,  levy'  a  tax  sufficient 
to  provide  $560,000  a  year  for  the  year  1921  and  each  succeeding 
seven  years  for  a  "University  Building  Fund."  This  is  additional 
to  the  other  mill  tax.  Available  without  further  appropriation. 

Montana.     Revised  Code,  1921,  Art.  2148. 

Nebraska.     Revised  Stats.,  1913,  Art.  7102.     Subject  to  appropriation. 

Nevada.  Statutes,  1920-21,  p.  226.  Beginning  in  1921-22  the  Uni- 
versity is  to  be  wholly  supported  from  the  mill  tax.  Law  specifies 
that  not  less  than  two  cents  shall  be  set  aside  for  buildings. 
Constitution  Art.  11,  Sec.  6,  provides  for  a  tax  not  in  excess  of 
two  mills  for  support  and  maintenance  of  university  and  com- 
mon schools. 

North  Dakota.  Compiled  Laws,  1913,  Vol.  2,  p.  340.  There  is  a  tax 
of  one  mill  levied  for  the  university,  school  of  mines,  the  agricul- 
tural college,  the  normal  schools,  the  school  for  the  deaf  and 
dumb,  and  two  other  institutions. 

Ohio.  Laws  of  Ohio,  1921.  For  the  years  1921-1922  and  1922-1923 
there  shall  be  levied  a  tax  of  125/1000  of  one  mill  for  the  purpose 
of  providing  a  building  fund  for  Ohio  State  University,  Ohio 
University,  and  Miami  University.  Of  the  fund,  14  per  cent 
goes  to  Ohio  University,  14  per  cent  to  Miami  University  and 
the  remainder  (72  per  cent)  to  Ohio  State  University. 

Oregon.  Laws,  1920,  Arts.  5427,  5428,  5443,  5466.  Available  with- 
out further  appropriation.  Until  1920  University  had  three- 
tenths  mill,  the  Agricultural  College,  four-tenths  mill  and  the 
Normal,  one-twenty-fifth  mill.  In  an  election  in  May,  1920,  the 
people  voted  a  6  per  cent  increase  in  the  amount  of  taxes  levied 
each  year  over  the  preceding  year. 

Tennessee.  Public  Acts,  1921,  p.  48.  Proceeds  go  first  to  meeting 
interest  on  the  $1,000,000  bond  issue  for  buildings.  Any  surplus 
beyond  specifications  in  the  act  may  be  used  for  maintenance. 

Utah.     Compiled  Laws,  1917,  Art.  5214. 

Washington.  Laws,  1920-1921,  p.  528.  Changes  in  the  rates  to  be 
reported  on  by  the  joint  board  of  higher  curricula  in  the  report 
next  preceding  the  convening  of  the  Legislature  in  1925.  Wash- 
ington is  the  only  state  which  makes  orderly  provision  for  possible 
periodical  change. 


A  Mill  Tax  for  Higher  Educational  Institutions      155 

• 

Wisconsin.  Statutes,  1913,  Sees.  390,  406a.  Subject  to  specific  ap- 
propriation by  the  Legislature. 

Wyoming.  Compiled  Statutes,  1920,  Arts.  482,  2939.  Available  with- 
out further  appropriation.  The  four-eighths  mill  is  divided  into 
one-eight  for  buildings  and  permanent  improvements  and  three- 
eighths  for  maintenance. 

The  rates  given  in  the  second  and  third  columns  of  the  tables  are 
presumably  the  current  rates.  In  column  four  certain  rates  are  given 
in  parenthesis,  and  these  are  the  old  rates  and  the  ones  in  effect  for 
the  proceeds  given  in  column  four. 

The  data  in  column  four  were  obtained  from  Statistics  of  State 
Universities  and  State  Colleges,  for  the  year  ending  June  30,  1920, 
Bulletin,  1920,  No.  48,  Bureau  of  Education,  Department  of  Interior. 


J.56 


University  of  Texas  Bulletin 


13  bJO 

C  G 

OS  '£ 

8  I 


2  .2 

0>  *- 

>  ^ 

G  03 

3  £ 
-2  "3 

03  cj 


I  s 

•*3       ±J 
$3 

M     oj 
0>   5 

3  Z 
c 

o    g 

g  I 
Is 

o 

8*1 

g-8| 

^    S   -M 

W  g  '" 
Q  2  s 
Q  ^  ^  • 

«<  M  g  c 
—  **•  g 

5 
g 

I 


3 'S. 

£  2 
ft 

ft 


I B. 

BJ  nj 

-M  CO 

rf)  O5 


S3 

^  c 


*"O 

^ll 

fi   *  >» 

O    . .  ja 


s  I 


^£3     Q) 

§.53 


q>    0)  ^ 

e^'s 


e 
«  o 


•Jl 
ffl 

is 

ft  CO 
X    CO 

W  °l 

05" 


o  o 
o  o 

•  O  O   • 
.  o  O   • 

•  05  10 
C-  O5 

:8 

"  O5 

!  «o 

CO 

•   •   '  O.  O  O  O 

.  .  .0000 

*  O5  rf  ^J*  GO 
*  C-  Tt«  C-  U3 

rH  CO  CO  O 

IO  LO 
O  (M 

•  O5  CO 
•  rH  O5    • 

•  CO 

•   •   •  -*  00  t-  O 

•  •  •  e-  co  co  10 

§ 


o  o  o 
o  o  o 


030 


o 

10    rH    O 
rH~   rf  CT 

rH    rH    00 


oooooooooo 
oooooooooo 


;    O5    O5    O5    O5 


COOO 
OOrH 


O 


•P      X 

D    c3 

v\    C"^ 


ooo-ooooooooooooooooo 
oooooooooooooooooooo 


§t- 
o 


CO    CO    CO    t-    O    O    Tt    t-.OO    COOlOOOCOO5rHO5 
_      CO    ^*    O5    00    LO    ^^    CO    O5    rH    00    '^    ^5    GO    IO    "^    t^    rH    CO 


IO    IO    IO    t-    »O    CO 

CO    rH    IO    CO    CO    rH 


o  o  o        o 

O    O    ~    O     O 


H^SorH^rH 

f 

co 


«''"•'» 


2§ 

t>    CO 


CO     ^      o     —     00    CO 


;   2 

•    03 


02  !  !  !  ' 

1 

.     O)       5/0      • 
•    be     o>      • 

:   :3 

be  !  I  S 

!     ! 

•  'o    to      •      •      •      •  u 

:   :  °  c    :   :  ^  c  \     3  1 

«o_-S.        ^5r=o^ 

;   i'g  ' 

>   «i  5 

S  :  •&§ 

6  Si  .£  ti 

ss       ^  c 

I  » 

-s 


0 

c 

3    jj 


II1§I  :1I'S 

2   ^   3  HH   §   >>  -M  x 
•S  ,2  ie  o  a  £   §  -S 


Mi  -   ?8Ii?lfl 


y 
y 


W||«f«o 

^  M  >»s  >>  >» 

•"£    o    o  -"S        ."S 

'S    ^   ^   '«     Ctf    '« 

^ojoj^C^^.^o; 
.>    S    g    >  |    >    >  -g  .> 
c  'O   c   c  -S   c 


Un 
Un 


Co 
Co 


^P 


jj 


c  .a 
8  S 
•s  R 


2  S 

G)  O 

>  > 

'2  '2 

D  D 


3  g 

a   g   g 

°    o 


S     ^^^ 

5». -S  ^  ^ 

- 1 S  j 

2  x  2 


YC  0422P 


5221)30 


UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA  LIBRARY 


